sukvis* 

ILLINOIS 

Rivers  and  Lakes  Commission 

Bulletin  No.  9.  CHICAGO,  ILL.  July  31,  1912. 


The  Illinois 

W  ater-Power- W  ater- Way 


AN  ATTACK  BY 

EBIN  J.  WARD 

AND  DEFENSE  BY 

ROBERT  ISHAM  RANDOLPH 


' 


[S  STATE  WATER 
LIBRARY  COPY 


TATE  OF 


Issued  in  Accordance  with 
Act  of  the  General  Assembly 
Approved  June  10,  1911. 


STATE  OF  ILLINOIS 


Rivers  and  Lakes  Commission 


Bulletin  No.  9.  CHICAGO,  ILL.  July  31,  1912. 


The  Illinois 

W  ater-Power- W  ater- W  ay 


AN  ATTACK  BY 

EBIN  J.  WARD 


AND  DEFENSE  BY 

ROBERT  ISHAM  RANDOLPH 


Issued  in  Accordance  with 
Act  of  the  General  Assembly 
Approved  June  10,  1911. 


SPRINGFIELD,  ILLINOIS: 

Illinois  State  Journal  Co.,  State  Printers 
1912. 


WATER-POWER-WATER- WAY. 


Mr.  Ebin  J.  Ward,  of  Marseilles,  Illinois,  has  circulated  a  pamphlet 
under  date  of  January  15,  1912,  entitled  “The  Illinois  Water-Power- 
Water- Way — If  constructed  can  the  promises  made  to  the  people  he  ful¬ 
filled,  and  will  its  cost  warrant  the  burden  to  the  tax  payers  ?” 

Mr.  Ward’s  attacks  upon  the  State  plan  for  the  construction  of  a 
waterway  between  Lockport,  Illinois,  and  Utica,  Illinois,  and  the  con¬ 
servation  of  the  water  power  in  the  DesPlaines  and  Illinois  rivers  have 
been  numerous.  To  date  no  one  has  seen  fit  to  challenge  his  statements, 
and  I  would  fain  let  him  enjoy  his  controversy  by  himself;  but  at  the 
earnest  solicitation  of  friends  of  the  waterway,  who  imagine  that  his 
criticisms  carry  weight,  I  have  undertaken  to  answer  his  arguments. 

Mr.  Ward  is  a  resident  of  Marseilles,  and  his  attacks  upon  the  State 
waterway  plan  are  not  disinterested,  as  will  appear  from  the  following: 

On  March  9,  1867,  the  Legislature  passed  an  Act  to  incorporate  the 
Marseilles  Land  and  Water  Power  Company  under  which  this  company 
was  authorized  to  construct  a  dam  not  exceeding  eight  feet  high  above 
low  water.  It  is  alleged  that  this  Act  gave  the  corporation  perpetual 
right  to  this  privilege.  In  1869  the  Legislature  amended  this  Act,  and 
the  amendment  was  approved  March  27,  1869,  providing  that  when  the 
State  shall  take  possession  of  the  dam  for  navigation  purposes  the  State 
shall  cause  a  reasonable  compensation  to  be  paid  to  said  Land  and 
Water  Power  Company.  At  the  time  of  the  building  of  the  dam  the 
Water  Power  Company  entered  into  a  contract  with  the  owner  of  the 
frontage  on  the  south  side  of  the  river  providing  that  in  case  the  owner 
on  that  side  should  so  elect  he  could,  at  any  time,  take  one-quarter  of  the 
water  in  consideration  of  his  frontage,  the  Water  Power  Company  to 
maintain  the  dam  in  consideration  of  the  other  quarter  in  addition  to 
their  own  half.  The  successor  to  the  second  party  of  this  contract  is 
Ebin  J.  Ward. 

While  it  is  apparent  that  Mr.  Ward  has  had  the  right  to  draw  one- 
quarter  of  the  water  and  to  use  it  for  power  purposes,  he  has  not  for 
some  forty  years  taken  advantage  of  that  right.  The  right  apparently 
did  not  seem  to  him  a  valuable  one  until  it  appeared  that  the  State  of 
Illinois  might  condemn  this  right  for  the  purposes  of  a  waterway. 

Immediately  after  the  failure  of  the  Legislature  to  pass  a  waterway 
bill  during  the  regular  session  of  1910,  there  was  incorporated  the  Mar¬ 
seilles  Hydraulic  Company,  certificate  of  incorporation  for  ninety-nine 
years  issued  on  June  18,  1910.  The  object  of  the  corporation  is  to  “to 
acquire  by  lease  or  purchase  or  by  lease  and  purchase  water  power  and 
—2  R  L 


4 


water  power  rights;  also  to  acquire  by  lease  or  purchase  or  by  lease  and 
purchase  such  real  estate  as  may  be  necessary  to  the  development  of 
such  water  rights  to  be  used  in  the  development  of  hydro-electric  power 
plants,  such  hydro-electric  power  when  so  developed  to  be  leased,  sold 
and  distributed  for  lighting,  heating  and  power  purposes.” 

On  June  30,  1910,  two  days  after  the  certificate  of  incorporation  was 
issued  to  the  Marseilles  Hydraulic  Company,  Ebin  J.  Ward,  of  Mar¬ 
seilles,  executed  a  lease  to  this  company  of  his  lands  and  water  rights 
in  Marseilles,  consisting  of  land  lying  south  of  the  Illinois  river  at  Mar¬ 
seilles,  together  with  alleged  water  power  and  riparian  rights,  for  a  term 
of  99  years.  Under  the  term  of  this  lease,  Ward  is  to  receive  rentals  as 
follows : 

$1,000  for  the  first  year;  $2,000  for  the  second  year;  $3,000  for  the 
third  year;  $4,000  for  the  fourth  year;  $5,000  for  the  fifth  year;  $6,000 
for  the  sixth  year;  and  for  each  and  every  year  thereafter  $6,000  per 
year.  In  Article  10  of  this  lease,  the  lessee  is  given  an  option  to  pur¬ 
chase  this  property  at  any  time  within  ten  years  for  the  sum  of 
$125,000.00.  The  lessee  is  also  given  the  right  to  dig  a  channel  and 
erect  a  powerhouse  on  this  property. 

It  will  be  seen,  therefore,  that  certain  alleged  rights  accruing  to  Mr. 
Ward;  but  which  he  did  not  attempt  to  enjoy  for  something  like  forty 
years,  suddenly  became  immensely  valuable.  For  some  unaccountable 
reason  the  potential  water  power  that  had  been  neglected  for  forty 
years,  one  that  is  exceedingly  difficult  to  develop  on  account  of  the  neces¬ 
sity  of  a  head  race  through  an  elevated  country,  became  suddenly  so 
valuable  that  Mr.  Ward  is  enabled  to  sit  back  and  draw  a  handsome  in¬ 
come  from  the  property  without  turning  a  hand.  It  is  apparent,  there¬ 
fore,  that  Mr.  Ward’s  attack  upon  the  State  plan  for  a  waterway  and  the 
conservation  of  water  power  is  not  entirely  disinterested.  These  facts 
must  be  kept  in  mind  when  regarding  Mr.  Ward’s  animadversion  on  the 
State  plan. 

I  have  outlined  Mr.  Ward’s  interest  in  the  matter — permit  me  to 
explain  my  own. 

I  am  the  Secretary  of  the  Rivers  and  Lakes  Commission  of  Illinois. 
This  commission  is  charged  with  the  duty  of  disseminating  information 
with  regard  to  the  waterways  in  the  State,  and  with  the  further  duty  of 
protecting  the  rights  and  interests  of  the  public  in  these  waterways.  For 
this  employment.  I  receive  what  I  believe  to  be  a  fair  remuneration,  and 
I  have,  moreover,  an  abiding  faith  in  the  feasibility?',  practicability  and 
public  good  of  the  State  waterway  and  water  power  project.  My  interest 
is  tempered  to  some  extent  by  the  fact  that  I  have  an  inherent  distaste 
for  controversy.  Be  that  as  it  may,  it  now  becomes  mv  duty  to  defend 
this  project  at  the  instance  of  its  friends,  who  are  of  the  people  and 
represent  the  people. 

It  has  been  charged  that  the  so-called  electric  power  trust  has  been 
circulating  Mr.  Ward’s  pamphlet  and  his  arguments  freely  throughout 
the  State.  This  may  or  may  not  be  true,  but  in  order  to  give  Mr. 
Ward’s  pamphlet  the  same  degree  of  publicity  as  my  reply,  I  present 
herewith  his  attack  and  my  defense  in  parallel  columns: 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 
in  2017  with  funding  from 

University  of  Illinois  Urbana-Champaign  Alternates 


https://archive.org/details/illinoi  s  wate  rpowOO  ward 


View  No.  410— This  view  was  taken  March  24.  1912,  on  which  date  the  ice  in  the  river ^commenced  j^j^et‘he^Qr °iroy®(jIceTfhe)',cofferdan'iS  with- 

is  being-  held  back  by  the  temporary  cofferdam  on  the  Iowa  shore,  the  northeast  corner  of  which  is  in  the  iore^rounu. 
stood  this  enormous  pressure  without  sustaining  any  damage. 


5 


Income,  and  Values  to  State. 


Prior  to  the  election  of  Novem¬ 
ber,  1908,  when  a  majority  of  the 
voter$  favored  amending  the  State 
Constitution  so  as  to  permit  the  is¬ 
suing  of  $20,000,000  bonds  for  the 
construction  6f  a  deep  waterway 
from  Joliet  to  Utica,  published 
statements  lead  the  people  to  be¬ 
lieve  that  the  State  was  asked 
merely  to  lend  its  credit  for  a  few 
years  when  the  total  expenditure 
would  be  returned  to  the  treasury 
from  the  enormous  income  that 
would  surely  be  derived  from  the 
use  by  the  State  of  what  it  was 
claimed  was  in  reality  its  own  prop¬ 
erty,  but  which  designing,  unscrup¬ 
ulous  men  either  had  “grabbed”  or 
were  about  to  “grab.” 

One  of  these  widely  distributed 
circulars  states:  “if  the  entire  net 
receipts,  $3,500,000  are  applied,  the 
bonds  would  be  paid  in  eight  years 
and  two  months.  *  *  *  The  sur¬ 

plus  earnings  above  that  required  to 
pay  the  bonds  will  be  paid  into  the 
State  Treasury  to  lessen  the  taxes 
of  the  taxpayers  of  this  State.” 
Another  leaflet,  of  which  over  half 
a  million  were  distributed  by  State 
officials,  says:  “The  annual  net 

revenue  will,  therefore,  be  $2,- 
500,000.  *  *  *  The  bonds  will 

be  retired  in  fourteen  years  of  op¬ 
eration,  and,  as  shown  by  the  fore¬ 
going  summary,  the  entire  issue 
can  be  retired  with  a  net  profit  to 
the  State  of  $2,355,694.85.  This 
presents  the  case  in  its  most  un¬ 
favorable  aspect;  and  this  is  not 
all,  for  the  property  will  continue 
to  yield  its  perpetual  yearly  revenue 
of  $2,500,000  *  *  *  ”  Other  cir¬ 

culars  of  similar  import  were  sent 
broadcast  over  the  State  and  were 
backed  by  verbal  statements  of  even 
tenor.  In  his  message  of  November 
6,  1907,  Governor  Deneen  says: 
“It  is  estimated  that  the  four  power 
points  between  Joliet  and  Utica 
would  produce  130,000  effective  H. 
P.  on  the  turbine  shaft.  The  value 
of  this  power  as  a  going  concern  is 
variously  estimated  at  from  $400  to 
$500  per  horse  power,  or  an  aggre¬ 
gate  of  $52,000,000  to  $65,000,000, 
*  *  *.”  The  entire  project  is, 

therefore,  of  such  a  character  that 
the  cost  of  the  works  can  be  paid 


I  am  constrained  to  amend  Mr. 
Ward’s  statement  as  follows: 

Prior  to  the  election  of  Novem¬ 
ber,  1908,  when  an  overwhelming 
majority  of  the  voters  favored 
amending  the  State  constitution. 
The  vote  upon  the  constitutional 
amendment  was  as  follows:  675,- 
898  For;  193,298  Against.  It  is 
true  that  published  statements  led 
the  people  to  believe  that  the  State 
was  merely  asked  to  lend  its  cred¬ 
it,  not  for  a  few  years,  but  for 
twenty  years.  If  these  statements 
led  the  people  to  believe  this,  they 
were  successful  in  their  mission, 
for  that  is  exactly  what  they  were 
designed  to  do,  and  that  is  all  that 
was  asked  of  the  people,  all  that 
is  expected  of  the  people,  in  this 
project,  for  we  still  believe  and 
maintain  that  the  total  expenditure 
required  to  construct  this  water¬ 
way  and  conserve  this  water  power 
will  be  returned  to  the  treasury 
and  that  the  bonds  will  be  retired 
within  twenty  years. 

We  still  maintain  and  affirm  that 
thfe  potential  water  power  in  this 
stretch  of  river  between  Lockport 
and  Utica  is  the  State’s  property. 
The  only  thing  that  makes  it  a 
water  power  is  the  artificial  incre¬ 
ment  of  flow  from  Lake  Michigan 
sent  down  the  DesPlaines  and  Illi¬ 
nois  rivers  through  the  Chicago 
Drainage  canal  constructed  at  the 
expense  of  the  people.  The  state¬ 
ment  that  men — I  hesitate  to  call 
them  unscrupulous,  but  I  do  call 
them  designing — had  grabbed  or 
were  about  to  grab  this  water 
power,  has  been  confirmed  in  the 
light  of  subsequent  developments. 
It  is  seen  that  Mr.  Ward  and  his 
lessees  suddenly  realized  the  enor¬ 
mous  value  of  the  property  that 
had  lain  dormant  for  forty  years 
and  proceeded  to  develop  this 
value. 

The  widely  distributed  circular 
referred  to,  making  the  .wild  state¬ 
ment  objected  to  is  qualified  with 
an  If.  Unfortunately  many  wild 
and  extravagant  statements  in  re¬ 
gard  to  the  proposed  waterway  and 
water  power  plan  were  made.  I, 
personally,  have  heard  spellbinders 
navigate  battleships  through  Illi- 


G 


out  of  the  revenue  by  the  mere  use 
of  the  credit  of  the  State  and  with¬ 
out  burden  to  the  people.”  It  was 
even  claimed  that  all  this  in  reality 
belonged  to  the  State  at  that  time, 
and  that  it  was  only  necessary  for 
the  Legislature  to  rub  Aladdin’s 
lamp  and,  lo!  an  annual  income 
variously  estimated  from  $2,500,000 
to  $3,250,000  would  perpetually  flow 
into  the  treasury  to  “lessen  the 
taxes  of  the  tax  payers  of  this  State. 
Had  not  Governor  Deneen  in  his 
message  to  the  Legislature  on  Nov. 
6,  1907,  said:  “The  basis  for  the 
proposal  to  submit  to  the  people 
this  constitutional  amendment  was 
the  ascertained  fact  that  the  result¬ 
ing  water  power  would  more  than 
repay  the  cost  of  construction  of 
the  proposed  waterway,  provided 
the  State  should  preserve  its  un¬ 
doubted  right  to  the  total  water¬ 
power  available  along  the  line  of 
the  proposed  waterway?”  Comment¬ 
ing  on  Attorney  General  Stead’s 
opinion  in  the  Dresden  Heights 
case,  Governor  Deneen  in  his  mes¬ 
sage  of  Nov.  26,  1907,  says:  “If 
the  State  has  no  right  to  the  water¬ 
power  to  be  developed  it  is  mani¬ 
fest  that  since  the  constitutional 
amendment  was  submitted  on  the 
assumption  that  the  water-power 
would  pay  for  the  waterway,  the 
invalidating  of  that  assumption 
would  greatly  imperil  if  it  did  not 
entirely  destroy  the  chance  of  its 
approval  by  the  voters.”  With  such 
glittering  generalities  set  before 
them,  no  wonder  the  people  sat  up 
and  took  notice!  No  wonder  the 
election  was  carried  “for”  the  bond 
issue. 


nois  cornfields,  but  I  do  not  believe 
that  either  Cicero’s  advocacy  or 
Mr.  Ward’s  antagonism  wholly 
damn  the  project. 

The  leaflet,  of  which  over  half 
a  million  copies  were  distributed, 
is  very  familiar  to  me,  as  I  wrote 
it  and  distributed  it.  The  state¬ 
ments  mafle  therein  are  correct, 
and  I  still  believe  that  the  prem¬ 
ises  were  and  are  correct.  The 
only  reservation  I  will  make  in  re¬ 
gard  to  this  pamphlet  is  that  it 
presented  the  case  in  its  most  un¬ 
favorable  aspect — that  it  was  too 
conservative. 

And  that  is  not  all,  for  the  prop¬ 
erty  will  continue  to  yield  its  per¬ 
petual  yearly  revenue  of  $2,500,000 
more  or  less. 

That  other  circulars  of  similar 
import  were  sent  broadcast  over 
the  State  I  was  aware.  I  was  not 
aware  that  eight  specially  prepared 
and  signed  circulars  and  printed 
reports  of  many  addresses  were 
widely  distributed  in  LaSalle 
county.  I  knew  that  the  Hon.  H. 
W.  Johnson,  then  a  member  of  the 
Internal  Improvement  Commission 
was  advocating  the  project  in  La¬ 
Salle  county,  and  I  believed  then 
and  believe  now  that  his  advocacy 
was  able. 

It  was  claimed  and  it  is  claimed 
that  the  water  power — the  only 
constant  and  effective  water  power 
— belongs  to  the  State  because  it 
was  made  possible  by  the  constant 
flow  through  the  Chicago  Drainage 
Canal,  which  was  built  with  the 
people’s  money.  Reference  to  Alad¬ 
din’s  lamp  suggests  the  remark 
that  Mr.  Ward  has  found  a  way  to 
rub  it  so  that  it  will  produce  a 
handsome  income  from  alleged  ri¬ 
parian  rights  that  had  produced 
him  nothing  in  forty  years. 

The  statement  that  a  yearly  in¬ 
come  would  perpetually  flow  into 
the  treasury  and  lessen  the  taxes 
of  the  taxpayers  of  this  State  is 
not  complete.  This  project  would 
do  more  than  that;  its  realization 
would  furnish  cheap  power  to  the 
people  of  the  Illinois  valley  who 
are  now  at  the  mercy  of  the  power 
trust. 

That  the  State  should  preserve 
its  undoubted  right  to  the  total 
water  power  available  along  the 


7 


Approval  of  1 

Since  these  power-sites  belonged 
to  the  State,  and  since  the  State 
had  the  sole  right  to  the  use  of  the 
water  flowing  in  the  DesPlaines 
and  the  Illinois  rivers,  the  State 
should  at  once  take  possession  of 
its  own  and  proceed  to  oust  those 
who  were  alleged  to  be  wrongfully 
trying  to  hold  possession  at  Dres¬ 
den  Heights.  Suit  was  started  and 
our  Supreme  Court  handed  down  a 
decision  that  the  State  does  not 
own  the  right  to  use  the  water  at 
Dresden.  In  this  decision  the  court 
holds:  “But  if  this  transition  is  to 
occur — if  the  powerful  hands  of  the 
government  are  to  lay  hold  of  this 
gigantic  enterprise — they  must  do 
so  with  due  regard  to  the  sacred 
rights  of  every  citizen,  however 
humble  and  insignificant  those 
rights  may  seem  in  contrast  with 
the  great  public  consummation.” 

Above  the  city  of  LaSalle,  sec¬ 
tions,  townships  and  ranges  cross 


line  of  the  proposed  waterway 
made  available  by  the  artificial  in¬ 
crement  of  flow  through  the  Drain¬ 
age  Canal  is  still  the  contention 
of  the  State,  and  we  question  Mr. 
Ward’s  right,  or  the  right  of  any 
riparian  owner,  to  this  benefit 
which  was  created  by  the  public. 

The  fact  that  the  voters  did  ap¬ 
prove  the  constitutional  amendment 
by  an  overwhelming  majority  is 
only  proof  that  the  people  them¬ 
selves  believed  they  had  a  right  to 
this  by-product  which  they  them¬ 
selves  had  created. 

That  glittering  generalities  were 
offered  the  public  is  true;  that  flag 
waving  and  buncombe  were  gen¬ 
eral  is  true;  but  this  line  of  talk 
was  employed  by  both  sides  to  the 
controversy  and  the  defense  has 
not  yet  discarded  it. 

It  is  in  fact  no  wonder  that  the 
people  sat  up  and  took  notice — no 
wonder  that  the  election  was  car¬ 
ried  for  the  bond  issue.  “You  can¬ 
not  fool  all  of  the  people  all  of  the 
time,”  and  when  the  great  ma¬ 
jority  of  them  had  sifted  the  truth 
from  the  bunk  they  went  to  the 
polls  and  protected  their  own  in¬ 
terests. 


rs  Imperiled. 

Mr.  Ward  cites  the  decision  of 
the  Supreme  Court  in  the  Dresden 
Heights  case  to  the  effect  that  the 
State  does  not  own  the  right  to 
use  water  at  Dresden.  It  may  not 
be  generally  known  that  this  opin¬ 
ion  was  dissented  from,  but  such 
is  the  case,  and  the  suit  has  been 
carried  into  the  United  States 
courts.  The  Supreme  Court  of  Illi¬ 
nois  is  not  infallible;  its  decisions 
are  not  final  and  no  man  can  say 
what  the  rights  of  the  people  at 
Dresden  Heights  are  until  the  suit 
has  been  taken  to  the  Supreme 
Court  of  the  United  States  and  a 
final  verdict  rendered. 

The  sacred  rights  of  every  citi¬ 
zen,  upon  which  Mr.  Ward  dis¬ 
courses,  have  not  yet  been  deter¬ 
mined. 

It  is  true  that  above  the  city  of 
LaSalle  sections,  townships  and 
ranges  cross  the  Illinois  river  and 
that  United  States  land  patents 


s 


the  Illinois  river  and  United  States 
land  patents  make  the  river  the 
monument.  The  river  front  at  Mar¬ 
seilles  is  on  Section  24,  T.  33  N.,  R. 
4  E.  of  3d  P.  M.  and  there  are  no 
reservations  in  the  land  patents; 
hence  riparian  owners  take  to  the 
center  thread  of  the  stream.  That 
the  Illinois  river  above  LaSalle  is 
not  considered  navigable  by  the 
War  Department  and  by  Congress 
is  indicated  by  recent  reports  of 
the  former  and  by  at  least  one  re¬ 
cent  act  of  the  latter.  That  the 
perpetual  charter  granted  by  the 
State  to  The  Marseilles  Land  and 
Water  Power  Company  in  1867,  as 
amended  in  1869,  and  under  and 
by  virtue  of  which  valuable  prop¬ 
erty  rights  have  accrued  partakes 
of  the  nature  of  a  contract  between 
the  State  and  the  parties  to  whom 
the  grant  was  made  cannot  be  de¬ 
nied;  and  that  the  State  is  prohib¬ 
ited  from  passing  a  “law  impairing 
the  obligation  of  contracts”  is 
equally  clear. 

Article  1,  Sec.  10,  Constitution  of 
the  United  States. 

Story  on  Constitution,  4th  Edi¬ 
tion,  from  Sec.  1392  (p.  253)  to 
Sec.  1396. 

Cooley  on  Constitutional  Limita¬ 
tions,  3d  Edition,  p.  279. 

Dartmouth  College  v.  Woodward, 
4  Wheat.,  518. 

Therefore,  it  is  absurd  to  suppose, 
as  has  been  frequently  intimated  is 
intended,  that  the  State  can  destroy 
the  dam  and  thq  large  manufactur¬ 
ing  interests  at  Marseilles,  without 
paying  the  value  thereof.  The  de¬ 
struction  of  that  property  will  cost 
the  State  millions  of  dollars.  (See 
cuts  showing  dam  and  factories  at 
Marseilles,  pages  10-11.)  According 
to  Governor  Deneen  these  condi¬ 
tions  in  conjunction  with  the  above 
mentioned  Supreme  Court  decision, 
greatly  imperil  if  they  do  not  en¬ 
tirely  destroy  the  chance  of  the  ap¬ 
proval  of  the  waterway  scheme  by 
the  voters  of  the  State,  for  the  State 
must  purchase  every  water-power 
site  from  Joliet  to  Utica. 


made  the  river  the  monument.  It 
is  also  true  that  these  United 
States  land  patents  made  fractional 
quarters  the  monument;  that  the 
river  was  meandered,  and  that  this 
meander  is  a  monument  to  its  nav¬ 
igability. 

That  the  Illinois  river  above  La¬ 
Salle  is  not  considered  navigable 
does  not  affect  its  navigability  in 
law  or  in  fact.  The  Ordinance  of 
1787,  Article  IV,  defined  the  naviga¬ 
bility  of  the  DesPlaines  and  Illi¬ 
nois  rivers  thus: 

“That  the  DesPlaines  river,  from 
the  point  where  it  most  nearly  con¬ 
nects  itself  with  the  Illinois  and 
Michigan  Canal  to  its  source  with¬ 
in  the  boundaries  of  this  State,  is 
hereby  declared  a  navigable  stream, 
and  shall  be  deemed  and  held  a 
public  highway  and  shall  be  and 
remain  free,  open,  and  unob¬ 
structed  from  the  said  point  of 
connection  with  the  said  canal  to 
its  utmost  limit  within  this  State, 
for  the  passage  of  all  boats  and 
water-crafts  of  every  description.” 

The  foregoing  Ordinance  was 
recognized  by  all  of  the  Acts  of 
Congress  and  all  of  the  constitu¬ 
tions  of  the  State  of  Illinois. 

In  1837  the  General  Assembly  of 
Illinois  enacted  a  law  declaring 
the  DesPlaines  river  navigable 
from  its  source  to  its  junction 
with  the  Illinois  and  Michigan  Ca¬ 
nal.  The  navigability  of  the 
stream  at  Marseilles  is  attested 
further  by  the  Act  which  permitted 
the  Marseilles  Land  and  Water 
Power  ’  Company  to  build  their 
dam.  The  navigability  of  the  river 
in  fact  is  attested  by  the  fact  that 
in  1844  a  big  side-wheel  steamer, 
the  “Superb”  took  .a  full  cargo  of 
produce  from  Moris,  above  Marseil¬ 
les,  to  St.  Louis,  and  it  was  gener¬ 
ally  understood  that  any  boat 
which  could  go  over  the  Hennepin 
Flats  could  come  on  to  Marseilles 
if  it  wanted  so  to  do. 

The  alleged  perpetual  charter  of 
the  Marseilles  Land  and  Waterpow¬ 
er  Company  expressly  says  that  the 
State  may  take  possession  of  the 
dam,  or  remove  it  at  any  time,  for 
improving  the  said  Illinois  river 
for  the  purposes  of  navigation.  How 
this  may  affect  the  alleged  right  of 
perpetuity  in  the  charter,  or 


9 


Horse-Power  to  Yield  $2y 

Bearing  in  mind  the  Governor’s 
statement  that  the  “constitutional 
amendment  was  submitted  on  the 
assumption  that  the  water-power 
would  pay  for  the  waterway,”  and 
that  the  “invaliding  of  that  assump- 


whether  the  Legislature  had  any 
power  to  grant  perpetual  rights  in 
a  navigable  stream,  is'  immaterial, 
because  under  the  State  plan  for 
a  waterway  we  do  not  propose  to 
take  the  Marseilles  dam  for  pur¬ 
poses  of  navigation.  We  propose 
to  go  around  it  entirely.  It  has  no 
function  whatever  in  the  develop¬ 
ment  of  the  waterway  or  water 
power.  The  only  way  in  which  it 
will  be  affected  is  that  it  will  be 
deprived  of  the  artificial  increment 
of  flow  from  the  Drainage  Canal 
by  the  construction  of  another  dam 
above  it. 

Whether  the  people  or  the  Mar¬ 
seilles  Land  and  Water  Power  Com¬ 
pany  and  the  Marseilles  Hydraulic 
Company  own  this  artificial  incre¬ 
ment  is  still  to  be  determined. 

If  the  right  of  people  to  this  ar¬ 
tificial  increment  of  flow  is  deter¬ 
mined,  reference  to  the  law  im¬ 
pairing  obligation  of  contracts  is 
immaterial,  and  other  references  to 
the  constitution,  the  Bill  of  Rights, 
the  Magna  Charta  or  the  Lord’s 
Prayer  are  equally  immaterial. 

If  it  is  determined  that  the  water 
power  companies  have  any  equity 
whatever  in  the  artificial  increment 
of  flow  from  the  Drainage  Canal,  it 
is  not  beyond  the  range  of  possi¬ 
bility  that  this  equity  can  be  trans¬ 
ferred  to  the  State  plant  at  Bell’s 
Island,  and  that  the  present  opera¬ 
tors  of  the  plants  at  Marseilles 
would  be  glad  to  abandon  their 
low  head  developments  and  receive 
a  compensating  amount  of  power 
from  the  State  switchboard  at 
Bell’s  Island. 

That  the  State  must  purchase  ev¬ 
ery  water  power  site  from  Joliet 
to  Utica,  we  do  concede.  We  main¬ 
tain  that  there  are  no  water  powers 
between  Joliet  and  Utica,  that  are 
worth  the  building  of  a  dam,  if 
they  are  deprived  of  the  right  of 
using  the  artificial  increment  of 
flow  from  Lake  Michigan. 

>,000  Annually  to  State. 

We  admit  the  statement  that  “the 
constitutional  amendment  was  sub¬ 
mitted  on  the  assumption  that  the 
water  power  would  pay  for  the 
waterway.”  Nay,  more,  we  affirm 
it. 


10 


tion  would  greatly  imperil,  if  it  j 
would  not  entirely  destroy  the 
chance  of  its  approval  by  the 
voters,”  let  us  inquire  into  the  phy¬ 
sical  conditions  existing  in  the  val-  j 
ley  and  ascertain  whether  the  pro¬ 
posed  State  power-plants  will  pro¬ 
duce  sufficient  electricity  to  annu¬ 
ally  bring  to  the  State  treasury  the 
$2,500,0u0  net  the  people  were  told 
would  be  theirs. 

Regarding  the  proposed  hydro¬ 
electrical  development  certain  al¬ 
leged  facts  have  been  officially  pub¬ 
lished  on  the  correctness  of  which 
rests  the  entire  claim  that  even  the 
first  cost  of  the  waterway  will  ever 
be  returned  to  the  State  treasury. 

In  order  to  realize  the  annual  net 
revenue  of  not  less  than  $2,500,000, 
there  must  be,  according  to  the  re¬ 
port  of  the  Internal  Improvement 
Commission: 

(a)  A  flow  of  14,000  cubic  feet 
per  second  from  Lake  Michigan. 

(b)  The  heads  under  which  the 
turbines  are  to  work  must  be  as 
follows: 

FEET. 

Brandon’s  Road,  Plant  No.  1. . .  24 

Big  Dresden  Island,  Plant  No.  2  18 


Bell’s  Island,  Plant  No.  3 .  26 

Utica,  Plant  No.  4  .  20 

Total  .  88 


(c)  With  the  above  attained  it 
is  stated  by  the  Internal  Improve¬ 
ment  Commission  that  the  water¬ 
power  in  the  water  column  will  be 


as  follows. 

H.  P. 

Brandon’s  Road  .  38,182 

Big  Dresden  Island .  28,636 

Bell’s  Island  .  41,364 

Utica  . 31,818 


Total  .  140,000 


It  is  claimed  that  this  will  yield 
100,000  electric  horse-power  on  the 
switchboards,  and  that  this  can  be 
leased  at  an  annual  profit  to  the 
State  of  at  least  $2,500,000. 

To  determine  the  horse-power  in 
the  water  column  we  have  the  for¬ 
mula:  H.  P.=cubic  feet  of  flow  per 
second  multiplied  by  the  head  in 
feet  multiplied  by  the  decimal 
0.11363.  If  in  this  formula  14,000 
be  substituted  for  “cubic  feet  of 
flow  per  second”  and  the  head  cor- 


Let  us,  therefore,  inquire  into 
the  physical  conditions  as  they  ex¬ 
ist  in  the  valley  and  ascertain 
whether  the  proposed  State  power 
plants  will  produce  sufficient  elec¬ 
tricity  to  pay  for  the  waterway. 

The  alleged  facts,  which  have 
been  officially  published  on  the  cor¬ 
rectness  of  which  rest  the  entire 
claim  that  even  the  first  cost  of  the 
waterway  will  ever  be  returned  to 
the  treasury  are  easily  verified.  We 
are  willing  to  stand  by  the  state¬ 
ment  and  the  tabulation  of  avail¬ 
able  heads  and  possible  water 
’power  developments  quoted  by  Mr. 
Ward. 

We  accept  the  formula  presented 
by  Mr.  \Vard  for  figuring  horse 
power,  and  it  is  gratifying  to  have 
him  check  our  arithmetic. 

It  is  true  that  if  the  head  under 
which  the  turbines  work  in  any 
power  plant  be  less  than  that  as¬ 
sumed,  the  horse  power  in  the 
water  column  will  be  less  than  that 
claimed,  but  it  is  true  only  for 
short  periods.  It  is  furthermore 
true  that  if  a  flow  of  14,000  second 
feet,  upon  which  we  base  our  es¬ 
timates,  is  not  available  the  net 
annual  revenue  of  $2,500,000  will 
not  materialize.  It  is  also  true 
that  if  this  volume  of  flow  is  re¬ 
duced  to  the  10,000  feet  per  second, 
which  Mr.  Ward  seems  to  be  will¬ 
ing  to  concede  to  us,  that  in  round 
numbers  100,000  gross  horse  power 
will  be  developed,  which  will  pro¬ 
duce  80,000  horse  power  net  on  the 
switchboard  and  will  return  $2,000,- 
000'  in  yearly  revenue  to  the  State. 

Therefore  we  are  still  able  to 
show  that  the  bonds  will  be  retired 
within  the  time  limit  and  that  a 
net  annual  revenue  of  $2,000,000 
a  year  will  redound  to  the  credit  of 
the  State. 


11 


responding  to  each  of  the  above 
power-plants,  the  horse-power 
claimed  by  the  Internal  Improve¬ 
ment  Commission  for  each  power- 
site  will  be  derived.  From  the 
formula  it  is  seen  that  if  the  con¬ 
stant  flow  of  water,  actually  ob¬ 
tained,  is  less  than  14,000  cubic  feet 
per  second,  or  if  the  head  under 
which  the  turbines  work  at  any 
power  plant  be  less  than  that  as¬ 
sumed,  the  horse-power  in  the  water 
column  will  be  less  than  that 
claimed  and,  therefore,  the  expected 
net  annual  revenue  of  $2,500,000 
will  not  materialize. 

Requirements  oe  the  United  States. 


As  to  the  probability  of  obtaining 
a  constant  flow  from  Lake  Michigan 
of  ±4,000  second  feet  and,  if  ob¬ 
tained,  at  what  cost  to  the  State, 
may  be  seen  from  the  following  ex¬ 
tracts  from  the  report  of  the  Special 
Commission  of  U.  S.  Engineers  of 
which  Brig.  Gen.  W.  H.  Bixby  was 
chairman.  This  report  was  sub¬ 
mitted  to  Congress  on  February  9, 
1911,  and  is  the  one  which  has  been 
widely  spoken  of  as  favoring  the 
deep  waterway  plans. 

“A  careful  examination  has  been 
made  of  the  detailed  estimates  pre¬ 
sented  by  the  State  of  Illinois.  So 
far  as  concerns  the  engineering 
features  alone,  such  as  excavation, 
construction  of  dams,  locks,  power 
plants,  etc.,  the  estimated  cost  is 
reasonable.  The  State’s  estimate, 
however,  includes  nothing  for  flow- 
age  damages  nor  for  the  purchase 
of  water-power  rights  and  fran¬ 
chises,  and  should  the  outcome  of 
judicial  proceedings  now  pending 
cause  these  damages  and  rights  to 
assume  great  value,  the  State’s  esti¬ 
mate  would  then  be  insufficient. 

“For  purposes  of  navigation  a  di¬ 
version  from  Lake  Michigan  of  less 
than  1,000  second  feet  of  water  is 
all  that  will  be  necessary.  For 
purposes  of  sanitation  the  works  of 
the  Sanitary  District  of  Chicago 
were  designed  to  allow  of  10,000 
second  feet  and  now  contemplate  a 
total  of  14,000  second  feet,  the  ad¬ 
ditional  4,000  second  feet  to  be  ob¬ 
tained  by  the  diversion  of  water 
through  the  Calumet  river  and  a 

— 3  R  L 


As  to  the  probability  of  obtain¬ 
ing  a  constant  flow  from  Lake 
Michigan  of  14,000  second  feet,  the 
probability  or  possibility  is  mere 
conjecture.  It  seems  to  be  conced¬ 
ed  by  all  parties  to  the  controversy 
that  in  any  event  the  Sanitary 
District  will  be  allowed  to  use 
10,000  second  feet  and  even  with 
10,000  second  feet  the  water  power 
proposition  is  feasible,  practical, 
and  advisable.  It  is  not  to  be  as¬ 
sumed  that  the  Congress  of  the 
United  States,  in  which  is  vested 
the  final  authority  in  this  matter, 
will  permit  the  demands  of  special 
interests  to  overshadow  the  claims 
of  two  and  one-quarter  million  peo¬ 
ple  who  have  spent  $66,000,000  of 
their  own  money,  not  for  gain,  but 
for  health  and  life.  Moreover,  if 
the  Congress  of  the  United  States 
puts  any  restrictions  on  this  flow 
which  reduces  its  quantity  to  less 
than  10,000  second  feet,  then  has 
Mr.  Ward  handed  his  lessee,  the 
Marseilles  Hydraulic  Company,  a 
gold  brick,  for  with  the  natural  flow 
of  the  river  the  water  power  at 
Marseilles  would  not  be  worth  de¬ 
veloping. 

Mr  Ward  quotes  the  report  of  a 
Special  Board  of  Army  Engineers, 
of  which  Brig.  Gen.  W.  H.  Bixby 
was  chairman,  which  was  present¬ 
ed  to  Congress  February  9,  1911. 
It  is  gratifying  to  note  that  this 
Board  of  army  experts,  after  a  care¬ 
ful  examination  of  the  waterway 
estimates  presented  by  the  State  of 
Illinois,  has  found  that  the  State’s 


12 


connecting  canal  following  the  Sag 
route.  The  War  Department,  while 
awaiting  the  definite  action  of 
Congress,  has  so  far  permitted  the 
diversion  of  4,167  second  feet  and 
the  Sanitary  District  is  understood 
to  be  using  7,000  second  feet.  As 
the  water  which  is  at  present  be¬ 
ing  diverted  from  the  lake  appears 
to  have  already  seriously  affected 
navigation  in  its  harbors  and  con¬ 
necting  waterways,  prompt  congres¬ 
sional  action  is  recommended  to 
limit  the  diversion. 

“While  it  appears  to  have  been  as¬ 
sumed  that  the  Sanitary  District 
may  be  allowed  to  divert  10,000  sec¬ 
ond  feet  so  long  as  actually  neces¬ 
sary  for  sanitary  purposes,  the  di¬ 
version  of  the  waters  of  the  Great 
Lakes  from  their  natural  outlet  for 
power  development  alone  is  mad- 
missable,  under  the  recent  treaty 
between  the  United  States  and 
Great  Britain.  The  future  diver¬ 
sion  of  water  from  Lake  Michigan 
for  any  purpose  is  fraught  with  dif¬ 
ficulties.  Not  only  has  Canada  an 
interest  in  the  maintenance  of  lake 
levels  which  the  United  States  must 
recognize,  but  every  foot  of  water 
flowing  through  the  Chicago  Drain¬ 
age  canal  lessens  the  flow  at  Nia¬ 
gara  Falls  and  at  the  power  sites 
along  the  St.  Lawrence  river,  where 
due  to  the  fall  available,  the  same 
amount  of  water  will  create  about 
four*  times  the  power  that  can  be 
generated  from  it  on  the  DesPlaines 
and  Illinois  rivers.  The  treaty  en¬ 
ables  riparian  owners  of  Canada,  as 
well  as  of  the  United  States,  who 
consider  themselves  injured  by  such 
diversion,  to  bring  suit  in  the 
United  States  courts  to  protect  their 
interests.  The  claim  that  more 
than  1,000  cubic  feet  per  second  is 
required  for  purposes  of  navigation 
cannot  be  maintained.  The  treaty, 
however,  recognizes  as  proper  the 
use  of  water  for  sanitary  purposes, 
and  it  is  the  opinion  of  the  board 
that  only  such  water  should  be  di¬ 
verted  from  Lake  Michigan  as  is 
indispensable  for  sanitation,  and 
then  only  with  a  provision  for 
proper  compensating  works  in  the 
outlets  of  the  lakes  to  prevent  a 
lowering  of  their  levels.  Water  thus 
diverted  may  be  used  incidentally 


estimate  includes  nothing  for  flow- 
age  damages.  Moreover,  it  reverses 
the  Special  Board  of  Army  En¬ 
gineers,  which  made  a  report  upon 
a  waterway  from  Lockport  to  Utica 
in  1905.  This  Board  estimates  the 
flowage  damages  for  such  a  water¬ 
way  at  $340,000,  and  the  State’s 
estimate  for  a  waterway  between 
Lockport  and  Utica  contains  the 
same  estimate  of  cost  for  flowage 
damages.  The  State  project  will 
flood  approximately  the  same  num¬ 
ber  of  acres  as  the  project  of  ihe 
1905  Beard  of  Army  Engineers. 
The  State’s  estimate  does  not  in¬ 
clude  anything  for  the  purchase  of 
water  power  rights  or  franchises, 
and  neither  did  the  estimate  of  the 
1905  Board  of  Army  Engineers.  We 
still  maintain  arid  affirm  that  there 
are  no  water  power  rights  which 
the  State  must  Duy  to  accomplish 
its  project. 

The  statement  of  this  special 
Board  of  Engineers  that  a  diver¬ 
sion  of  less  than  1,000  second  feet 
of  water  is  all  that  will  be  neces¬ 
sary  for  navigation  purposes  is  dis¬ 
ingenuous.  This  statement  is  made 
on  the  assumption  of  a  slack  wat¬ 
ered  river  and  provides  for  only  the 
amount  of  water  necessary  to  main¬ 
tain  lockage.  It  is  pertinent  to 
inquire  how  Mr.  Ward  himself 
would  like  to  have  the  flow  reduced 
to  the  1,000  feet  per  second  sug¬ 
gested  by  the  Special  Board  of 
Army  Engineers.  Does  his  contract 
with  the  Marseilles  Hydraulic  Com¬ 
pany  insure  his  handsome  income 
to  such  an  extent  that  he  is  care¬ 
less  of  the  amount  of  water  which 
it  is  permitted  to  use? 

It  is  significant  that  this  Special 
Board  of  Army  Engineers  makes 
the  statement  that  the  water,  which 
is  at  present  being  diverted  from 
the  Lake,  appears  tp  have  already 
seriously  affected  navigation  in  its 
harbors  and  connecting  waterways. 
This  insidious  statement  is  made 
time  and  again,  and  neither  the 
Army  Board  nor  anybody  else  ap¬ 
pears  to  come  out  and  make  the 
flat  statement,  that  the  water  di¬ 
verted  through  the  Drainage  Canal 
has  seriously  affected  navigation. 
Under  the  direction  of  the  United 
States  Engineer  Corps,  and  by  or- 


13 


for  power  purposes,  but  care  must 
be  exercised  in  authorizing  the  di¬ 
version  of  water  for  sanitary  pur¬ 
poses,  to  restrict  it  to  the  amount 
necessary  for  those  purposes  alone. 

“Until  it  obtains  further  data  the 
board  defers  its  report  upon  the 
measures  required  to  properly  pre¬ 
serve  the  levels  of  the  Great  Lakes 
and  to  compensate  so  far  as  prac¬ 
ticable  for  the  diminished  level  in 
such  lakes  by  reason  of  any  diver¬ 
sion  of  water  from  Lake  Michigan 
*  *  *  >> 

The  above  report  of  the  special 
board  was  submitted  to  the  Board 
of  Engineers  for  Rivers  and  Har¬ 
bors,  as  required  by  law,  and  the 
report  of  this  board  contains,  among 
other  things,  the  following: 

“In  conclusion  it  is  recommended 
that  the  work  proposed  by  the 
special  board  for  the  United  States 
in  the  Illinois  river  be  not  under¬ 
taken  until  the  Secretary  of  War 
has  received  satisfactory  assurance 
from  the  State  of  Illinois  that-  the 
State  will  build  that  portion  of  the 
waterway  from  Lockport  to  Utica 
without  cost  to  the  United  States, 
and  in  accordance  with  plans  to  be 
approved  by  him;  and,  further,  un¬ 
til  the  interests  of  the  United  States 
have  been  satisfactorily  safeguarded 
as  indicated  by  the  special  board, 
viz.,  that  the  State  of  Illinois  or 
its  agencies  shall  assume  entire  re¬ 
sponsibility  in  perpetuity  for  all 
damages  by  changes  in  lake  levels 
incident  to  the  work,  including  cost 
of  compensating  works  and  for  all 
damages  to  riparian  owners  along 
the  proposed  waterway  from  Lake 
Michigan  to  the  mouth  of  the  Illi¬ 
nois  river,  and  that  the  State  shall 
transfer  to  the  United  States  the 
locks  and  the  control  of  the  new 
waterway  thus  created  so  far  as 
needed  for  navigation,  and  the 
locks  and  dams  at  Henry  and  Cop¬ 
peras  creek  on  the  Illinois  river.” 

Our  treaty  with  Great  Britain 
considers  Lake  Michigan  an  inter¬ 
national  body  of  water.  In  fixing 
the  uses  of  water  which  may  be 
drawn  from  the  Great  Lakes,  this 
treaty  contains  the  following  clause: 
“The  following  order  of  precedence 
shall  be  observed  among  the  various 
uses  enumerated  hereinafter  for 


der  of  Congress,  work  has  been 
done  in  the  interlake  channels 
which  has  caused  a  reduction  of 
lake  levels  vastly  greater  than  has 
resulted,  or  ever  can  result,  from 
the  work  of  the  Sanitary  District 
of  Chicago.  Moreover,  the  treaty 
with  Great  Britain  sets  forth  in  no 
uncertain  terms  the  use  for  which 
water  may  be  taken,  and  in  giving 
the  order  of  precedence  it  presents, 
first,  the  use  for  domestic  purposes, 
and  after  that  the  use  for  naviga¬ 
tion.  As  the  treaty  gives  preced¬ 
ence  to  the  requirements  of  the 
Sanitary.  District  and  as  it  is  clear 
that  the  increased  flow  caused  by 
deepening  of  interlake  channels  for 
the  benefit  of  navigation  has  not 
the  prior  claim,  it  will  not  avail 
the  Army  Board,  or  anybody  else, 
to  cast  the  aspersion  upon  the 
Chicago  Drainage  Canal  that  it  has 
lowered  the  lake  levels. 

The  Army  Board  says:  “While  it 
appears  to  have  been  assumed  that 
the  Sanitary  District  may  be  allow¬ 
ed  to  divert  10,000  second  feet  so 
long  as  actually  necessary  for 
sanitary  purposes.”  The  assumption 
seems  to  be  borne  out  by  the  terms 
of  the  treaty  with  Great  Britain. 
The  Army  Board  says  further 
that  the  diversion  of  waters  of  the 
Great  Lakes  from  their  natural 
outlet  for  power  development  alone 
is  inadmissible  under  the  treaty, 
but  the  treaty  allows  36,000  cubic 
feet  per  second  to  be  taken  for 
power  purposes  alone  on  the  Can¬ 
adian  side,  and  20,000  cubic  feet 
per  second  to  be  taken  for  power 
purposes  afone  within  the  State  of 
New  York.  The  use  of  lake  water 
for  power  and  irrigation  purposes 
comes  third  in  the  order  of  preced¬ 
ence  defined  in  Article  8  of  the 
treaty.  If,  therefore,  86,000  cubic 
feet  per  second  of  lake  water  is  to 
be  allowed  by  the  treaty  for  the 
use  in  water  power  development 
alone  what  power  is  there  to  deny 
to  the  people  of  the  commonwealth 
of  Illinois  their  primary  right  to 
use  10,000  or  even  14,000  cubic  feet 
a  second  for  domestic  purposes? 

We  will  .quote  from  the  report  of 
the  Special  Board  of  Army  Engin¬ 
eers  to  the  effect  that  “every  foot 
of  water  flowing  through  the  Chi- 


14 


these  waters,  and  no  use  shall  be 
permitted  which  tends  materially 
to  conflict  with  or  restrain  any 
other  use  which  is  given  preference 
over  it  in  this  order  of  precedence: 

“1.  Uses  for  domestic  and  sani¬ 
tary  purposes. 

“2.  Uses  for  navigation,  includ¬ 
ing  the  service  of  canals  for  the 
purposes  of  navigation. 

“3.  Uses  for  power  and  for  irri¬ 
gation  purposes.” 

Now  note  what  the  government 
engineers  said:  “For  purposes  of 
navigation  a  diversion  of  less  than 
1,000  second  feet  of  water  is  all  that 
will  be  necessary.”  And  again: 
“The  claim  that  more  than  1,000 
cubic  feet  per  second  is  required  for 
purposes  of  navigation  can  not  he 
maintained.”  Therefore,  under  the 
treaty  the  amount  of  water  that  can 
be  used  at  the  State’s  power-plants 
will  be  limited  to  that  which  is  act¬ 
ually  necessary  for  sanitation.  At 
the  present  rate  of  flow  through  the 
Sanitary  Canal  14,000  second-feet 
will  not  be  needed  for  sanitation 
until  Chicago  has  a  population  of 
nearly  5,000,000. 

For  the  return  to  their  treasury 
of  the  $20,000,000  they  are  asked  to 
spend,  are  the  people  to  depend  on 
a  flow  of  14,000  second  feet  from 
Lake  Michigan,  that  is  so  far  in  the 
future,  or,  in  order  to  assure  that 
flow  at  once,  will  the  State  assume 
in  perpetuity  all  the  obligations  re¬ 
quired  by  the  United  States?  The 
treaty  with  Great  Britain  opens  in¬ 
ternational  questions.  Is  it  ex¬ 
pected  that  Congress  will  require 
less  of  Illinois  than  the  War  and 
the  State  Departments  maintain  is 
just  and  proper  or  less  than  will 
constitute  performance  of  our 
treaty  obligations?  If  it  is  shown 
that  the  withdrawal  of  14,000  sec¬ 
ond  feet  from  Lake  Michigan  af¬ 
fects  navigation  in  the  harbors  and 
connecting  waterways  of  the  Great 
Lakes  (and  the  U.  S.  Engineers  in¬ 
dicate  that  even  the  present  flow  is 
doing  so)  will  not  the  Lake  Car¬ 
riers’  Association  compel  Illinois  to 
“do  business”  or  shut  off  the  flow? 
Is  Illinois  ready  to  pay  the  price 
(including  the  maintenance  of  lake 
levels  by  the  construction  of  com¬ 
pensating  works  at  Niagara  and 


cago  Drainage  Canal  lessens  the 
flow  at  Niagara  Falls  at  the  power 
sites  along  the  St.  Lawrence  river.” 
This  is  a  most  significant  statement 
— mark  it  well — for  here  is  the 
source  of  the  strenuous  opposition 
to  the  Illinois  Waterway  Water 
Power.  This  is  "where  the  shoe 
pinches  the  water  power  trust.  Are 
we  to  assume  that  the  claims  of 
these  vested  interests  are  para¬ 
mount  to  the  claims  of  the  com¬ 
monwealth  of  Illinois  and  that  por¬ 
tion  of  her  citizenship  that  must 
purify  its  sewage  and  protect  its 
drinking  water  supply  by  an  ade¬ 
quate  volume  of  flow  through  the 
Chicago  Drainage  Canal? 

Again  we  find  the  statement  that 
the  “claim  that  more  than  1,000 
cubic  feet  per  second  is  required  for 
purposes  of  navigation  cannot  be 
maintained.”  Again  I  say  that  the 
statement  is  misleading — I  would 
hate  to  believe  that  it  is  purposely 
misleading — but  it  should  be  qual¬ 
ified  by  a  statement  of  the  fact  that 
here  the  Board  of  Army  Engineers 
means  that  1,000  cubic  feet  of  water 
per  second  is  all  that  is  needed  to 
supply  water  for  lockage  in  a  slack 
watered  river  between  Lockport 
and  Utica. 

Referring  to  the  report  of  the 
Special  Board  of  Engineers  on  a 
waterway  from  Lockport  to  St. 
Louis,  published  in  1905,  on  Page 
6  under  the  caption  of  “Vested 
Rights,”  I  find  that  “The  Board 
does  not  condemn  the  present  plan 
of  talcing  10,000  cubic  feet  per  sec - 
ond,  believing  as  it  does  that  some 
such  amount  will  be  needed  to  pro¬ 
tect  the  lives  and  health  of  the 
people  of  a  great  city  and  of  a 
populous  valley” 

The  Special  Board  of  Army  En¬ 
gineers,  which  reported  to  Con¬ 
gress  on  February  9,  1911,  is  doing 
an  unprecedented  thing  in  repudi¬ 
ating  this  part  of  the  report  of  the 
1905  Board. 

It  is  comforting  to  note  that  the 
treaty  with  Great  Britain  “recog¬ 
nizes  the  proper  use  of  water  for 
sanitary  purposes.1’  It  would  be 
more  enlightening,  however,  to 
state  the  fact  that  Article  VIII  of 
the  treaty,  which  clearly  defiines 
the  use  for  which  water  may  be 


Illinois  river  at  Bell’s  Island — Site  of  a  proposed  State  power-plant  at  a  time  when  during  nine  consecutive  weeks  not  one  of 
the  total  of  73,182  horse  power,  claimed  as  constant  at  Bell’s  Island  and  Utica,  would  have  been  produced. 


COPY  OF  AFFIDAVIT  ATTACHED  TO  ABOVE  PICTURE. 

Marseilles,  LaSalle  County,  Illinois. 

June  12,  1911. 

I  hereby  certify  that  on  the  fifth  day  of  March,  1903,  I  personally,  took  the  photograph  to 
which  this  affidavit  is  attached,  that  in  the  taking  of  said  photograph  my  camera  was  leveled 
with  a  spirit  level,  that  the  lense  used  was  of  normal  focus,  that  the  camera  stood  on  the 
left  bank  of  the  Illinois  river  opposite  Bell’s  Island,  about  two  and  one-half  miles  below  the 
highway  bridge  across  said  river  at  the  city  of  Marseilles,  LaSalle  county,  Illinois,  that  the 
line  of  sight  was  in  a  direction  north  of  westerly,  that  Bell’s  Island  may  be  seen  in  the  picture 
on  the  right  and  right-center  and  that  the  right  bank  of  the  Illinois  river  may  be  seen  on  the 
extreme  left  of  the  picture. 

(Signed)  C.  R.  Arnold. 

Subscribed  and  sworn  to  before  me  this  12th  day  of  June.  A.  D.  1911. 

(Signed)  W.  A.  Morey,  Jr., 

[notarial  seal]  Notary  Public. 


15 


near  Detroit)  in  order  to  secure  a 
flow  of  14,000  second  feet  from  the 
Great  Lakes  to  power-plants  along 
the  DesPlaines  and  Illinois  rivers? 
And  yet,  if  ^the  flow  to  the  State’s 
power-plants  falls  short  of  that 
figure,  the  annual  net  revenue  to 
the  State  treasury  will  fall  propor¬ 
tionately  below  the  $2,500,000 
claimed.  Were  the  voters  of  Illi¬ 
nois  fully  cognizant  of  these  con¬ 
ditions  when  they  voted  “for”  the 
amendment  of  the  Constitution  on 
November  3,  1908? 


taken,  gives  in  the  order  of  pre¬ 
cedence,  first  the  use  for  domestic 
purposes.  It  is  deplorable  that  an 
attempt  should  be  made  over  and 
over  again  by  any  governmental 
authority  to  foist  upon  the  Sani¬ 
tary  District  of  Chicago  the  obli¬ 
gation  to  build  “proper  compen¬ 
sating  works  in  the  outlets  of  the 
lakes  to  prevent  a  lowering  of 
their  levels.”  I  find  no  word  to 
characterize  it  when  it  is  consid¬ 
ered  that  the  work  done  in  the  in¬ 
terlake  channels  under  the  direc¬ 
tion  of  the  United  States  Engineer 
Corps  and  by  order  of  Congress  has 
caused  a  reduction  of  lake  levels 
vastly  greater  than  has  resulted, 
or  ever  can  result,  from  the  work 
of  the  Sanitary  District  of  Chicago. 

My  ire  is  still  further  aroused 
by  the  insidious  repetition  in  this 
paragraph  of  the  same  insinuation 
in  which  the  Board  suggests  reme¬ 
dial  works  “for  diminished  level  in 
such  lakes  by  reason  of  any  di¬ 
version  of  water  from  Lake  Michi¬ 
gan,”  The  Board  nowhere  makes 
its  acknowledgement  of  the  fact 
that  the  improvement  of  interlake 
channels  has  affected  lake  levels, 
and  when  it  does  not  make  the 
open  statement  that  the  Sanitary 
District  is  alone  responsible  for 
diminished  lake  levels  it  makes  the 
same  insidious  insinuation.  As  a 
matter  of  fact,  the  Board  has  not 
yet  successfully  demonstrated  that 
there  is  any  lowering  of  lake  levels. 

Here  the  Board  reaches  the  cli¬ 
max  of  its  audacity  when  it  makes 
the  statement  that  “the  State  of 
Illinois,  or  its  agencies,  shall  as¬ 
sume  entire  responsibility  in  per¬ 
petuity  for  all  damages  by  changes 
in  lake  levels  incident  to  the  work, 
including  the  cost  of  compensating 
works.”  This  is  a  culmination  of 
all  the  attempts  to  foist  the  results 
of  work  on  the  interlake  channels 
upon  the  Sanitary  District  of  Chi¬ 
cago  arid  the  State  of  Illinois. 

Not  only  that,  but  here  again 
the  attempt  is  made  to  saddle  upon 
the  Sanitary  District  all  claims  for 
damages  by  reason  of  overflow  in 
the  Illinois  river  alleged  to  be 
caused  by  the  construction  of  this 
waterway,  notwithstanding  the 
fact  that  the  construction  of  this 


16 


waterway  will  not  increase  over¬ 
flow  damages  to  riparian  owners 
along  the  Illinois  river  one  iota. 
The  slack  watering  of  the  Des 
Plaines  and  Illinois  rivers  between 
Lockport  and  Utica  will  not  to 
the  slightest  extent  affect  the  vol¬ 
ume  of  flow  or  the  acreage  of  lands 
overflowed  in  the  lower  Illinois. 
The  volume  of  flow  will  not  be  in¬ 
creased  one  drop  by  constructing 
locks  and  dams  in  the  upper  river, 
and  suits  for  alleged  overflow  dam¬ 
ages  have  no  more  bearing  upon 
the  construction  of  a  waterway  be¬ 
tween  Lockport  and  Utica  than  a 
suit  for  the  annulment  of  a  mar¬ 
riage  decree  in  Reno. 

The  statement  that  “under  the 
treaty  the  amount  of  water  that  can 
be  used  at  the  State’s  power  plants 
will  be  limited  to  that  which  is 
actually  necessary  for  sanitation” 
is  one  that  is  extremely  gratifying 
to  us.  The  present  flow  through 
the  Chicago  Drainage  Canal  is  en¬ 
tirely  inadequate  for  the  proper 
dilution  of  the  sewage  that  enters 
it.  In  fact  today  an  amount  of 
water  something  like  10,000  feet  a 
second  is  necessary  to  properly  di¬ 
lute  the  sewage  that  now  goes  into 
the  channel,  and  the  time  is  not 
far  distant  when  the  channel  will 
be  taxed  to  its  utmost  capacity  and 
its  ultimate  flow  of  14,000  feet  a 
second  will  be  required  to  properly 
dilute  the  sewage.  The  conditions 
today  are  so  bad  that  they  are  the 
subject  of  complaint  made  to  the 
Rivers  and  Lakes  Commission,  and 
the  Rivers  and  Lakes  Commission 
is  endeavoring  to  get  the  Sanitary 
District  of  Chicago  to  install  sew¬ 
age  purification  works. 

I  take  issue  with  the  statement 
that  at  the  present  rate  of  flow 
through  the  Sanitary  Canal  14,000 
second  feet  will  not  be  needed  for 
sanitation  until  Chicago  has  a  popu¬ 
lation  of  nearly  5,000,000.  For 
years  the  Calumet  district,  the  vast 
region  south  of  Englewood,  has 
been  calling  for  relief  from  the 
intolerable  condition  of  nuisance 
that  exists  on  account  of  its  inade¬ 
quate  sewage  disposal  facilities. 
The  outlying  districts  north  and 
west  or  Chicago  are  even  now  suf¬ 
fering  from  a  condition  of  intoler¬ 
able  nuisance  caused  by  their 


inadequate  sewage  disposal  facil¬ 
ities.  Most  of  this  territory  is 
not  within  the  municipal  limits 
of  the  Sanitary  District,  but  all 
of  it  is  tributary  to  the  Sani¬ 
tary  District  and  these  people  have 
a  right  to  the  relief  that  can  be 
afforded  them  uy  the  Sanitary  Dis¬ 
trict  of  Chicago. 

The  introduction  of  the  Lake 
Carriers’  Association  into  this  argu¬ 
ment  presents  another  powerful 
vested  interest  which  is  fighting  the 
public  interests  of  the  common¬ 
wealth  of  Illinois.  It  cannot  be 
shown  that  the  withdrawal  of  14,- 
000  second  feet  from  Lake  Michigan 
affects  navigation  in  the  harbors 
and  connecting  waterways  on  the 
Great  Lakes.  This  phase  of  the 
discussion  is  ably  discussed  in  Riv¬ 
ers  and  Lakes  Commission  Bulletin 
No.  6.  I  will  not  enlarge  upon  it 
here  for  it  is  already  in  print.  I 
respectfully  refer  my  readers  to 
this  Bulletin. 

Have  things  come  to  such  a  pass 
that  the  desire  of  corporate  greed 
to  secure  a  large  interest  on  its  in¬ 
vestments  is  superior  to  the  claims 
that  two  and  one  quarter  million 
people  have  upon  the  use  of  their 
investment  of  $66,000,000  made  for 
health  and  life? 

Here  again  we  find  an  attempt  to 
foist  the  cost  of  compensating 
works  required  by  the  increased 
flow  through  interlake  channels 
upon  the  Sanitary  district  of  Chi¬ 
cago,  and  I  beg  leave  to  quote  just 
one  paragraph  from  Bulletin  No.  6: 

“But  why  discuss  any  such  prop¬ 
osition  at  all  in  view  of  the  report 
of  the  Board  of  Government  En¬ 
gineers  that  remedial  works  at  the 
east  end  of  Lake  Erie  will  restore 
navigable  depths  at  a  cost  of  only 
$796,923,  and  when  it  is  further 
demonstrable  that  a  proper  control 
of  the  waters  of  Lake  Superior  by 
works  now  installed  will  remedy 
the  whole  evil?  It  may  be  urged 
that  the  existing  works  are  inade¬ 
quate,  but  it  cannot  be  denied  that 
they  can  be  made  adequate  by  a 
very  inconsiderable  additional  ex¬ 
penditure.  As  to  the  propriety  of 
Canadian  and  United  States  gov¬ 
ernmental  advice  to  a  city  in  any 
state  of  this  Union  as  to  the  man¬ 
ner  in  which  it  shall  dispose  of  its 


18 


sewage  and  conduct  its  municipal 
engineering,  I  must  leave  the  peo¬ 
ple  of  the  several  states  to  express 
their  opinions.” 

Actual  vs.  Claimed  Heads  on  Wheels. 


Now  as  to  the  actual  head  that 
will  be  obtained  on  the  turbines  at 
the  proposed  State  power  plants. 
For  the  time  we  will  assume  that 
there  is  a  flow  of  14,000  second  feet 
from  Lake  Michigan  and  will  con¬ 
sider  only  the  heads  under  which 
the  flow  can  be  used. 

The  Internal  Improvement  Com¬ 
mission  says  that  the  estimate  of  a 
total  head  of  88  feet  is  the  effective 
head  at  low  water.  That  is,  it  is 
the  greatest  head  to  be  obtained  at 
the  power  sites  at  low  water 
periods.  If  at  any  time  the  actual 
heads  obtained  at  the  various  power 
sites  are  less  than  those  assumed, 
the  net  annual  revenue  will  be  pro¬ 
portionately  reduced,  unless  the  de¬ 
crease  in  head  is  compensated  by 
an  increase  in  cubic  feet  of  flow 
per  second.  No  increase  in  quan¬ 
tity  of  water  beyond  14,000  second 
feet  is  expected  from  Lake  Michi¬ 
gan,  hence  it  is  only  from  the 
water-shed  that  such  increase  can 
■come.  That  it  is  expected  that  flood 
stages  will  affect  injuriously  the 
head  at  Utica  (and  therefore  the 
power  obtained)  is  admitted  by  the 
Internal  Improvement  Commission 
when  it  states:  “The  Utica  power 
will  always  be  affected  by  flood 
conditions  in  the  river  below,  but 
extreme  floods  are  exceptional,  and 
radical  improvement  in  the  Lower 
Illinois  should  better  these  condi¬ 
tions.  At  low  water  the  head  will 
he  twenty  feet,  but  this  should  be 
increased  by  river  improvement  to 
twenty-six  feet.”  To  add  at  low 
water  stage,  six  feet  of  head  at 
Utica  by  “improvement  in  the 
Lower  Illinois,”  where  there  is  a 
natural  low  water  slope  of  less  than 
30  feet  in  220  miles,  would  indeed 
require  “radical”  work,  and  how 
could  that  additional  six  feet  of 
head  be  maintained  at  all  times 
when  at  the  mouth  of  the  Illinois  ! 
the  water  of  the  Mississippi  has 
been  known  to  rise  to  a  height  ex¬ 
ceeding  the  total  low  water  slope  in 
the  Illinois  from  its  mouth  to  La¬ 
Salle,  so  that  in  the  natural  condi¬ 
tion  of  the  river  the  water  of  the 


Mr.  Ward  states  that  the  Inter¬ 
nal  Improvement  Commission  says 
that  an  estimate  of  a  total  head  of 
88  feet  is  the  effective  head  at  low 
water.  It  is  gratifying  to  find  the 
Internal  Improvement  Commission 
quoted  correctly  in  this  instance. 
This  estimate  assumes  that  10.4 
feet  out  of  a  total  head  of  98.4  feet 
will  be  consumed  in  slope,  back 
water  and  other  impediments  to 
flow,  and  that  the  effective  head 
will  be  88  feet  at  low  water. 

His  statement  that  “if  at  any 
time  the  actual  heads  obtained  at 
the  various  power  sites  are  less 
than  those  assumed,  the  net  annual 
revenue  will  be  proportionately  re¬ 
duced  unless  the  decrease  in  head 
is  compensated  oy  the  increase  in 
cubic  feet  of  flow  per  second.”  This 
is  almost  true.  It  is  a  fact  that  if 
the  heads  are  reduced  by  back 
water,  that  the  amount  of  power 
available  will  be  proportionately  re- 
uuced.  Any  increase  m  the  flow, 
however,  would  have  the  effect  of 
increasing  back  water  conditions. 

It  is  not  claimed  that  the  power 
at  Utica  will  not  be  drowned  out 
at  times. 

In  fact  the  statement  of  Mr.  Ly¬ 
man  E.  Cooley,  which  Mr.  Ward 
quotes,  to  me  effect  that  the  power 
plant  at  Utica  will  be  drowned  out 
in  flood  and  that  at  such  times  the 
other  three  plants  must  be  made  to 
carry  the  load  of  the  Utica  plant  is 
true.  It  is  not  true,  however,  un¬ 
der  the  plan  of  the  Internal  Im¬ 
provement  Commission,  that  the 
plant  which  is  below  Dresden 
Heights  will  be  drowned  out  in 
flood.  Under  our  plan  the  head 
race  is  carried  down  stream  in  a 
raised  channel  far  enough  to  be  be¬ 
yond  the  effects  of  back  water. 

Referring  to  the  photograph  of 
the  ice  gorge  in  the  Illinois  river 
at  Bell’s  Island  with  the  formid¬ 
able  affidavit  attached  thereto,  I 
remember  that  this  same  picture 
and  affidavit  were  exhibited  at  a 
hearing  before  the  Committee  of 
the ‘Whole  in  tne  House  of  Repre¬ 
sentatives,  and  that  the  photograph 


19 


Mississippi  will  materially  affect 
the  elevation  of  the  water  surface 
of  the  Illinois  at  Utica?  Mr.  Lyman 
E.  Cooley  says:  “The  two  sites  at 
Dresden  and  Utica  will  be  practic¬ 
ally  drowned  out  in  flood,  and  until 
channels  below  are  radically  de¬ 
veloped,  the  deficiency  must  be 
made  from  Joliet  and  Ottawa,  or  by 
steam  auxiliaries.”  That  the  State 
will  be  powerless  to  install  and  op¬ 
erate  steam  auxiliaries  will  scarcely 
be  denied.  The  above  statements 
admitting  a  loss  of  head,  and  there¬ 
fore  of  power  and  revenue,  which 
even  the  added  cubic  feet  of  flow 
per  second  from  the  watershed  can¬ 
not  overcome,  are  based  on  the  ef¬ 
fect  of  flood  waters,  i.  e.,  head 
waters.  During  the  winter  months, 
when  the  watershed  is  so  frozen 
that  the  “run  off”  is  small,  ice 
gorges  of  greater  or  less  height  and 
duration  are  not  at  all  infrequent. 
At  such  times  the  water  shed  will 
yield  little  water  to  compensate  for 
the  loss  of  head  due  to  back  water 
on  the  wheels.  The  picture  (see 
cut,  page  12,  showing  ice  gorge) 
shown  of  the  Illinois  river  at  Bell’s 
Island,  two  and  a  .half  miles  below 
Marseilles,  was  taken  from  the  left 
bank  in  1903.  The  line  of  sight  is 
down  stream.  It  is  exactly  at  this 
point  that  it  is  proposed  to  locate 
one  of  the  State’s  power  plants. 
The  particular  “ice  spell”  shown  in 
the  picture  extended  from  LaSalle 
to  Marseilles  and  lasted  for  nine 
consecutive  weeks,  during  which 
time  not  one  of  the  claimed  total  of 
73,182  horse  power  would  have  been 
produced  at  the  plants  at  Bell’s 
Island  or  Utica.  In  May,  1911,  Mr. 
Isham  Randolph  stated  before  the 
lower  house  of  the  Legislature  that 
eight  feet  of  head  is  required  on 
turbines  to  properly  produce  elec¬ 
trical  power.  Records  of  the  United 
States  Engineers,  of  the  Sanitary 
District  of  Chicago,  and  other  re¬ 
liable  authorities,  show  that  for 
varying  periods  the  proposed  plant 
at  Utica  would  have  been  absolutely 
shut  down  from  lack  of  head  on  its 
wheels  as  follows:  1883,  1890,  1892, 
1900,  1902,  1903,  1904,  1907,  1908, 
1909  and  1910.  At  other  times  dur¬ 
ing  each  of  these  years  the  head  on 
the  wheels  at  Utica  would  have 
varied  from  eight  to  ten  feet  for 
periods  ranging  into  weeks.  The 


and  affidavit  made  a  profound  im¬ 
pression  on  that  body.  I  am  free 
to  admit  that  the  photograph  was 
probably  taken  at  the  place,  at  tne 
time,  and  under  the  conditions  as 
set  forth  in  the  subscribed  and 
sworn  statement.  I  deny  that  it 
has  any  bearing  whatever  upon  the 
successful  operation  of  the  Bell’s 
Island  plant.  Ice  gorges  form  as 
this  one  did  in  bends  of  the  river 
where  the  channel  is  shallow;  the 
heavy  ice  loages  on  the  bottom  and 
forms  a  dam  against  which  all  of 
the  ice  coming  down  the  river 
lodges.  As  this  dam  is  built  up  the 
river  rises  and  more  ice  is  piled  up 
on  the  dam  with  the  final  effect 
that  at  times  the  channel  is  so 
gorged  that  the  Marseilles  plants 
suffer  from  back  water.  Now  un¬ 
der  the  State  plan  this  condition 
will  not  obtain,  and  if  it  did  obtain 
it  would  not  hinder  the  operation 
of  the  plant  at  Bell’s  Island.  It 
might  again,  as  it  has  done  be- 
for  bacK  up  water' upon  the  Mar¬ 
seilles  plants  and  impair  the  opera¬ 
tion  of  their  wheels.  Ice  gorges 
will  not  form,  however,  in  a  slack 
watered  channel.  The  hydro-elec¬ 
tric  plant  of  the  Sanitary  District 
of  Chicago  at  LocKport  is  typical 
of  the  plant  which  will  be  installed 
under  the  State  plan  at  Bell’s  Is¬ 
land.  The  Sanitary  District  plant 
has  never  suffered  from  ice  gorges. 
Ice  gorges  have  not  formed  in  the 
channel  below,  and  the  channel 
there  is  less  than  one-quarter  as 
wide  as  the  cnannel  in  the  river 
at  Bell’s  Island.  In  the  upper 
basin  at  Joliet,  before  the  channel 
was  dredged  to  its  present  depth, 
ice  gorges  did  form  in  the  then 
shallow  water  and  from  time  to 
time  these  had  to  be  dynamited. 
Since  this  channel  in  the  upper 
basin  above  dam  No.  1  at  Joliet 
has  been  deepened,  ice  gorges  have 
never  formed.  Mr.  Ward's  photo¬ 
graphic  bugaboo  may,  therefore, 
frighten  those  who  know  nothing  of 
the  conditions;  that  it  is  a  buga¬ 
boo,  the  successful  operation  of  the 
Sanitary  District  power  plant  at 
Lockport  throughout  five  consecu¬ 
tive  winters  will  testify. 

Mr.  Ward’s  photographic  bugaboo 
pales  into  insignificance  when  com¬ 
pared  with  the  photograph  of  an 
ice  gorge  at  the  site  of  the  Missis- 


20 


dam  at  Delbridge  Island  is  expected 
to  create  20  feet  of  head  at  the  Utica 
power  house,  and  yet  for  varying 
periods  back  water  would  have  stood 
even  above  the  crest  of  this  dam  as 
follows:  In  1883,  1892,  1902,  1903, 
1904,  1907  and  1909.  During  the 
rise  of  1904  the  water  would  have 
stood  above  the  crest  of  that  dam 
for  several  consecutive  weeks.  Such 
is  the  record  at  the  power  site 
where  it  is  claimed  that  under  a 
head  of  20  feet,  31,818  horse  power 
will  be  constantly  produced. 

Now  as  to  the  head  that  may  be 
expected  on  the  wheels  at  Bell’s 
Island,  where  it  is  claimed  that  un¬ 
der  a  head  of  26  feet,  41,364  horse 
power  will  be  constantly  produced. 
The  plant  at  this  site  would  have 
been  shut  down  in  1883,  1903  and 
1907.  The  records  we  have  show 
that  in  certain  other  years  the 
head  would  have  been  only  9.5  feet, 
11.0  feet,  12.9  feet,  13.1  feet  and 
14.5  feet,  instead  of  26  feet,  as 
claimed.  And  according  to  Mr. 
Randolph  electrical  power  cannot 
be  properly  produced  with  less 
than  eight  feet  of  head. 

It  is  greatly  to  be  regretted  that 
the  records  of  water  elevations 
over  the  stretch  of  river  from 
Joliet  to  Utica  are  so  few  and  in¬ 
complete.  But  certain  it  is  that  so 
far  as  the  proposed  plants  at  Bell’s 
Island  and  Utica  are  concerned, 
only  a  fraction  of  the  total  claimed 
head  can  be  depended  upon  to  pro¬ 
duce  anything  like  continuous 
power.  No  more  slope  can  be 
made  use  of  than  nature  has  placed 
in  the  stream.  Only  at  points 
where  the  slope  is  sufficiently  con¬ 
centrated  is  it  profitable  to  produce 
hydro-electric  power.  Excavation 
in  the  river  between  Marseilles  and 
Utica  will  not  lessen  the  ice  gorge 
nuisance,  for  ice  gorges  form  first 
below  the  Utica  bridge  and  grad¬ 
ually  back  up  stream,  constantly 
increasing  in  height  and  extent. 
Even  an  increase  of  flow  from  Lake 
Michigan  to  14,000  second  feet  will 
not  push  out  the  ice  for  it  is  held 
by  ice  at  the  toe  of  the  slope  near 
the  Utica  bridge.  The  ice  at  this 
toe  can  not  be  shoved  down  stream 
for  the  river  below  that  point  has  a 
slope  of-  only  about  an  inch  and  a 
half  per  mile. 


sippi  River  Power  Company’s  plant 
at  Keokuk,  herewith  presented. 
This  view  shows  an  enormous  ice 
gorge  on  the  very  spot  where  thte 
Mississippi  River  Power  Company 
is  spending  about  twenty  million 
dollars  in  the  construction  of  a  hy¬ 
dro-electric  power  plant  to  develop 
two  hundred  thousand  electrical 
horse  power.  All  of  this  ice  hasn’t 
cooled  the  ardor  of  the  engineers 
and  capitalists  who  are  back  of 
this  project. 

Mr.  Ward’s  assertion  that  in  May, 
1911,  Mr.  Isham  Randolph  stated  be¬ 
fore  the  lower  House  of  the  Legis¬ 
lature  that  eight ‘feet  of  head  is  re¬ 
quired  on  turbines  to  properly  pro¬ 
duce  electrical  power  is  not  entirely 
correct.  What  Mr.  Randolph  did 
state  was  that  electric  power  can¬ 
not  be  economically  developed  on 
heads  of  much  less  than  eight  feet. 

The  records  of  the  United  States 
and  those  of  the  Sanitary  District 
of  Chicago,  and  other  reliable 
authorities,  undoubtedly  do  show 
flood  heights  for  the  years  enum¬ 
erated  in  Mr.  Ward’s  statement. 
That  they  show  that  the  proposed 
plant  at  Utica  would  have  been 
absolutely  shut  down  from  lack  of 
head  on  its  wheels  on  the  dates 
mentioned,  I  deny;  and  that  the 
same  records  show  that  the  dam  at 
Delbridge  Island  would  be  drowned 
out  on  the  dates  mentioned,  I  deny. 
I  will  not  deny  the  records  of  flood 
heights  in  the  river  in  its  natural 
state,  but  I  do  deny  that  they  can 
be  twisted  to  show  flood  heights 
under  changed  conditions  in  a  slack 
watered  river. 

I  do  not  deny  that  the  plant  at 
Utica  will  be  drowned  out  under  cer¬ 
tain  flood  conditions.  The  report 
of  the  Internal  Improvement  Com¬ 
mission  so  states,  and  Mr.  Ward 
does  well  to  quote  Mr.  Cooley  who 
wrote  that  report.  This  eminent 
authority  says:  “The  Utica  power 
will  always  be  affected  by  flood  con¬ 
ditions  in  the  river  below.  Such 
floods  as  those  of  1883,  1892,  and 
1904  would  reduce  the  head  to  be¬ 
tween  10  and  12  feet,  but  such 
floods  are  exceptional. 

Accepting  Mr.  Cooley  as  authori- 
ty,  as  Mr.  Ward,  has  done,  and  ad¬ 
mitting  Mr.  Randolph’s  statement 
that  electrical  power  cannot  be  de¬ 
veloped  economically  at  heads  of 


21 


It  is  not  claimed  that  these  ex¬ 
treme  conditions  will  occur  each 
and  every  consecutive  year,  but  it 
is  insisted  that  they  may  obtain 
any  year  and  that  the  uncertainty 
as  to  when  they  will  occur  and  how 
long  they  will  last,  together  with 
the  probability  that  almost  each  and 
every  year  the  heads  on  the  wheels 
will  be  affected  to  a  greater  or  less 
extent,  will  render  a  large  percent¬ 
age  of  the  claimed  output  intermit¬ 
tent  and  therefore  of  very  little  or 
no  value.  Only  that  portion  of  the 
power  that  is  constant  can  be  dis¬ 
posed  of  at  a  profitable  price — the 
rest  will  be  of  little  use  to  anyone. 
So  far  as  the  river  between  Mar¬ 
seilles  and  Utica  is  concerned,  the 
power  that  can  be  depended  upon 
at  the  proposed  State  plants  will 
not  exceed  that  which  can  be  had 
on  the  Grand  Rapids  of  the  Illinois 
at  Marseilles.  And  yet  Mr.  Cooley 
states  that  the  plant  to  be  placed 
between  Marseilles  and  Ottawa  and 
which  at  times  will  fail  to  produce 
the  quota  of  power  assigned  to  it, 
must  turn  out  not  only  its  own  full 
quota  but  must  make  up  a  part  of 
the  shortage  to  be  expected  at  Dres¬ 
den  and  Utica.  With  such  known 
physical  conditions  admitted  by  Mr. 
Cooley  and  the  Internal  Improve¬ 
ment  Commission  and  more  specific¬ 
ally  proven  by  authentic  water  rec¬ 
ords,  even  with  a  flow  of  14,000 
second  feet  from  Lake  Michigan, 
would  the  State  be  warranted  in 
guaranteeing  to  lessees,  as  constant, 
100,000  horse  power  on  the  switch¬ 
boards?  And  yet  that  is  the  amount 
of  power  that  will  be  needed  to 
keep  faith  with  the  people  and  re¬ 
turn  their  money  to  the  State  treas¬ 
ury. 

If  the  State  would  build  a  dam  at 
Utica,  88  feet  high,  backing  water 
to  the  Sanitary  District  power 
house,  near  the  upper  limits  of 
Joliet,  the  theoretical  head  between 
those  two  points  could  be  utilized 
so  fully  as  possible  and  a  fine  water 
power  would  no  doubt  be  created. 
However,  the  people  of  the  State 
should  have  been  told  that  this 
same  amount  of  power  cannot  be 
produced  when  separated  into  four 
plants  down  streams  that  have  the 
natural  slopes  of  the  DesPlaines 
and  Illinois  rivers.  The  physical 


less  than  eight  feet,  I  submit  that 
the  10  to  12  feet  of  head  which  Mr. 
Cooley  says  would  still  be  available 
at  the  Utica  power  even  during 
such  floods  as  those  of  1883,  1892, 
and  1904  would  still  permit  of  a 
considerable  development  of  hydro¬ 
electric  power. 

Mr.  Ward  makes  the  academic 
statement  that  "no  more  slope  can 
be  made  use  of  than  nature  has 
placed  in  the  stream.”  We  will 
have  to  admit  this,  but  I  maintain 
that  at  Bell’s  Island  we  have  made 
use  of  all  of  the  smpe  nature  has 
provided.  To  quote  Mr.  Cooley 
again:  “Modern  practice  erects 
water  power  dams  at  the  foot  of 
rapids  rather  than  at  the  head, 
and  generally  down  stream  as  far  as 
possible  in  order  to  mask  the  effect 
of  floods.”  This  is  exactly  what  we 
have  done  in  locating  the  State 
power  plant  at  Bell’s  Island.  The 
present  power  plant  installations 
at  Marseilles  'are  at  the  head  of 
the  rapids  and  do  not  avail  them¬ 
selves  of  all  the  slope  that  nature 
has  put  in  the  stream  and  which 
can  be  made  use  of.  Even  now  in 
an  endeavor  to  increase  the  head 
at  Marseilles  and  to  take  advan¬ 
tage  of  all  the  slope  which  nature 
has  put  in  the  stream,  the  Mar¬ 
seilles  Land  and  Water  Power  Com¬ 
pany  and  the  Illinois  Traction 
Company,  its  lessees,  are  digging  a 
deeper  tail  race  to  discharge  far 
enough  down  stream  to  give  them 
the  benefit  of  three  feet  additional 
head. 

I  will  admit  for  the  sake  of  ar¬ 
gument  that  “excavations  in  the 
river  between  Marseilles  and  Utica 
will  not  lessen  the  ice  gorge  nuis¬ 
ance,”  but  slack  watering  this 
stretch  of  the  river  and  increas¬ 
ing  the  depth  thereby  will  elimin¬ 
ate  the  ice  gorge  nuisance. 

I  again  point  to  the  successful 
operation  of  the  Sanitary  District 
plant  at  Lockport  throughout  five 
successive  winters  with  entire 
freedom  from  “ice  gorge  nuisance” 
as  proof  of  what  the  changed  con¬ 
ditions  created  at  Bell’s  Island  by 
a  slack  watered  river  will  produce. 

It  is  comforting  to  note  that  Mr. 
Ward  does  not  claim  “that  these 
extreme  conditions  will  occur  each 
and  every  consecutive  year.” 


22 


conditions  are  against  the  proposi¬ 
tion  that  even  with  a  flow  of  14,000 
second  feet  from  Lake  Michigan, 
the  dream  of  a  salable  100,000 
horse  power  on  the  switchboards 
will  ever  be  realized. 


I  will  admit  that  they  may  ob¬ 
tain  any  year,  but  I  will  point  out 
that  the  uncertainty  as  to  when 
they  will  occur  and  how  long  they 
will  last  does  not  seem  to  have 
deterred  Mr.  Ward  and  his  lessees, 
the  Marseilles  Hydraulic  Company, 
from  spending  their  stockholders’ 
money  in  constructing  a  hydro¬ 
electric  plant  at  Marseilles.  Neither 
does  it  seem  to  have  deterred  the 
Marseilles  Land  and  Water  Power 
Company  and  its  lessee,  the  Illi¬ 
nois  Traction  Company,  from  mak¬ 
ing  extensive  improvements  in  the 
plant  on  the  north  bank  of  the 
river.  Fear  of  ice  gorge  nuisance 
and  of  impediments  from  back 
water  does  not  seem  to  have  deter¬ 
red  the  Economy  Light  and  Power 
Company  from  developing  power  at 
Joliet  under  a  twenty  year  lease 
from  the  State.  Fear  of  ice  gorges 
and  back  water  does  not  seem  to 
have  deterred  the  Economy  Light 
and  Power  Company  from  attempt¬ 
ing  to  build  a  dam  for  the  develop¬ 
ment  of  hydro-electric  energy  at 
Dresden  Heights.  It  appears  to 
me  that  there  must  be  some  very 
peculiar  condition  in  the  laws  of 
nature  governing  the  flow  of  water 
in  streams  that  makes  it  danger¬ 
ous  or  impossible  for  the  State  to  at¬ 
tempt  to  build  a  waterpower  plant 
and  sell  electric  energy  when  in 
the  same  river  and  at  practically 
the  same  points  a  private  enter¬ 
prise  seems  to  be  able  to  build 
dams  and  develop  hydro-electric 
energy  for  sale  with  impunity.  Is 
it  a  law  of  nature,  or  is  it  the 
cupidity  of  human  nature? 

Mr.  Ward  states  that  “so  far  as 
the  river  between  Marseilles  and 
Utica  is  concerned,  the  power  that 
can  be  depended  upon  at  the  pro¬ 
posed  State  plants  will  not  exceed 
that  which  can  be  had  on  the  Grand 
Rapids  of  the  Illinois  at  Marseil¬ 
les.”  In  the  light  of  the  fact  that 
the  owners  of  the  installations  at 
the  head  of  the  Grand  Rapids  of 
the  Illinois  at  Marseilles  are  bend¬ 
ing  every  effort  to  increase  the 
heads  at  these  installations  by  the 
use  of  flash  boards  and  by  the  ex¬ 
pedient  of  extending  the  tail  races, 
this  statement  is  exceedingly  amus¬ 
ing. 


23 


It  is  more  amusing  still  to  find 
Mr.  Ward  taking  issue  with  Lyman 
E.  Cooley.  I  hold  no  brief  for  Mr. 
Cooley,  but  I  know  that  he  has  for¬ 
gotten  more  about  hydraulics  than 
a  great  many  very  good  engineers 
ever  knew.  Mr.  Cooley’s  statement 
that  the  plant  to  be  placed  between 
Marseilles  and  Ottawa  must  turn 
out  not  only  its  own  full  quota  but 
must  make  up  a  part  of  the  short¬ 
age  to  be  expected  at  Dresden  and 
Utica  is  a  statement  that  cannot 
be  sucessfully  questioned.  The 
power  plants  proposed  in  the  State 
plan  are  not  separate  and  distinct 
installations,  but  four  component 
parts  of  one  installation.  If  one 
wheel  in  any  one  installation 
breaks  down,  the  others  carry  the 
load.  Just  so  the  big  public  ser¬ 
vice  corporations  have  numbers  of 
plants  scattered  over  their  terri¬ 
tories  that  all  pump  electricity  into 
the  trunk  lines.  No  man  can  say 
where  the  power  from  each  sepa¬ 
rate  plant  goes.  Just  so  the  four 
State  power  plants  will  all  pump 
their  juice  into  one  line.  When 
one  plant  fails  on  account  of  high 
water,  back  water,  or  ice  condi¬ 
tions,  it  is  not  reasonable  to  sup¬ 
pose  that  all  of  the  plants  will  fail 
at  the  same  time.  When  one  plant 
is  out  of  commission  for  any  one 
of  a  number  of  causes,  the  others 
collectively  must  supply  the  defi¬ 
ciency.  Neither  is  it  reasonable 
to  suppose  that  all  of  these  plants 
will  receive  their  peak  loads  at  the 
same  moment.  Anyone  who  knows 
anything  about  power  plant  eco¬ 
nomics  knows  that  it  is  possible 
to  sell  an  amount  of  electricity 
about  fifty  percent  in  excess  of  the 
total  rated  horse  power  of  each 
plant  simply  for  the  reason  that 
the  use  of  all  its  power  is  not  co¬ 
incident;  that  it  is  compensating; 
that,  for  instance,  when  one  man 
is  using  it  another  is  not,  and 
vice  versa;  that  when  two  men 
are  using  it,  one  or  two  others  are 
not,  and  vice  versa.  The  same  thing; 
is  true  developed  to  the  full  ratio 
of  the  entire  complement  of  power 
users  of  the  plant. 

Mr.  Ward’s  fear  that  the  State 
will  not  be  able  to  deliver  a  con¬ 
stant  100,000  horse  power  on  the 
switchboard  and  will  not,  there- 


V 


24 


State's  Power  More 

The  fact  is  that  all  the  salable 
power  that  can  be  produced  on  the 
Illinois  river  between  Morris  and 
LaSalle  is  concentrated  at  Mar¬ 
seilles  on  the  Grand  Rapids  of  the 


fore,  be  able  to  keep  faith  with  the 
people  and  return  their  money  to 
the  State’s  treasury,  is  touching. 
If  his  interest  in  keeping  profit  for 
himself  were  not  so  apparent,  his 
interest  in  keeping  faith  with  the 
people  would  be  more  plausible. 
His  seif-abnegation  is  commend¬ 
able. 

This  paragraph  provokes  my 
mirth.  His  statement  that  if  the 
State  would  build  a  dam  at  Utica 
88  feet  high,  backing  water  to  the 
Sanitary  District  power  house  near 
the  upper  limits  of  Joliet,  the  theo¬ 
retical  head  between  those  two 
points  could  be  utilized  so  fully 
as  possible  and  a  fine  waterpower 
w’ould  no  doubt  be  created.  He 
states,  however,  that  this  could  not 
be  done;  that  the  same  amount  of 
power  cannot  be  produced  when 
separated  into  four  plants  down 
streams  that  have  the  natural 
slopes  of  the  DesPlaines  and  Illi¬ 
nois  rivers.  The  report  of  the 
Internal  Improvement  Commission 
expressly  states  that  the  total  slope 
between  Lockport  and  Utica, 
amounting  to  10.4  feet  had  been 
subtracted  from  the  total  head  of 
98.4,  and  that  the  effective  head 
will  be  88  feet. 

With  Mr.  Ward’s  own  arithmetic 
I  will  deny  him.  On  page  2  of  the 
pamphlet  he  says  to  determine  the 
horse  power  in  the  water  column 
we  have  the  formula  H.P.=cuDic 
feet  of  flow  per  second.  Multiplied 
by  the  head  in  feet;  multiplied  by 
the  decimal  0.11363.  If,  in  this 
case,  we  take  the  head  in  feet  at 
88,  as  he  states,  and  the  flow  at 
14,000  second  feet,  as  he  states,  and 
substitute  in  the  formula,  we  find 
that  the  total  horse  power  produced 
is  139,992,  which  is  8  horse  power 
short  of  the  amount  produced  as 
figured  in  the  four  separate  plants. 
I  would  not  trust  my  own  arithme¬ 
tic  for  this  complicated  computa¬ 
tion,  but  I  am  satisfied  that  Mr. 
Ward’s  formula  cannot  be  at  fault. 

>ENSIVE  THAN  STEAM. 

Tne  fact  is  not  quite  as  Mr.  Ward 
states  it.  The  fact  is  that  all  the 
power  that  is  developed  at  Mar¬ 
seilles  is  salable  and  that  it  finds 
a  ready  market  within  a  stone’s 


25 


Illinois.  The  constant  power  at 
Dresden  Island  will,  probably,  not 
exceed  75  per  cent  of  that  claimed, 
and  it  is  possible,  though  scarcely 
probable,  that  the  power  at  Bran¬ 
don’s  Road  may  be  100  per  cent  of 
that  claimed.  It  is  highly  improb¬ 
able  that  the  United  States  will  per¬ 
mit  more  than  10,000  second  feet 
to  be  drawn  from  Lake  Michigan. 
Taking  these  figures  into  considera¬ 
tion,  together  with  the  heavy  bur¬ 
den  of  interest,  and  including  the 
expected  “net  profit  of  $25.00  per 
horse  power”  the  State’s  proposed 
electricity,  when  delivered  to  les¬ 
sees  on  the  switchboards  will  cost 
per  horse  power  such  a  sum  that, 
in  this  State,  where  fuel  is  so  cheap 
it  can  not  compete  with  electric 
power  generated  by  steam  in  large 
quantities. 


throw.  It  would  not  be  worth  the 
dam  which  the  Marseilles  Land  and 
Water  Power  Company  built  to  de¬ 
velop  it  if  it  was  deprived  of  the 
artificial  increment  of  flow  sent 
down  through  the  Sanitary  District 
canal  by  the  expenditure  of  $66,000,- 
000  of  the  people’s  money.  This  spe¬ 
cial  privilege  would  not  have  de¬ 
veloped  a  plant  so  expensive  if  it 
were  not  enjoying  this  artificial 
benefit  which  it  paid  not  one  dol¬ 
lar  to  create. 

Mr.  Ward  says  that  it  is  possible, 
though  hardly  probable,  that  the 
Brandon’s  road  power  may  be  one 
hundred  per  cent  of  that  claimed. 
This  is  merely  Mr.  Ward’s  unsup¬ 
ported  opinion,  and  as  such  may 
be  taken  for  what  it  is  worth. 

His  statement  of  the  probability 
of  the  amount  of  flow  that  would 
be  permitted  to  be  withdrawn  from 
Lake  Michigan  bears  the  same 
qualification.  It  is  not  subscribed 
and  sworn  to,  as  is  the  photo¬ 
graph. 

Mr.  Ward  says  that  in  this  State 
where  fuel  is  so  cheap  the  State 
power  plant  cannot  compete  with 
electric  power  generated  by  steam 
in  large  quantities.  I  do  not  know 
what  special  sources  of  information 
Mr.  Ward  has  with  regard  to  the 
development  of  electric  power  by 
steam,  but  I  do  know  that  nowhere 
can  I  find  authentic  figures  of  the 
cost  of  generating  electric  power  by 
steam  in  large  quantities  cheaper 
than  the  same  comparative  quan¬ 
tities  of  electricity  can  be  devel¬ 
oped  by  hydraulic  power.  I  shall 
be  glad  to  find  some  authentic 
figures  on  the  cost  of  steam  elec¬ 
tric  production  per  kilowatt  in 
large  quantities  in  this  State.  The 
large  public  service  companies  are 
not  particularly  anxious  to  have 
such  information  made  public.  I 
maintain  that  this  hydro-electric 
power,  which  it  is  proposed  to  de¬ 
velop  in  the  DesPlaines  and  Illinois 
livers  between  Lockport  and  Utica 
can  compete  with  electric  power 
generated  by  steam,  even  with  the 
low'  cost  of  Illinois  coal.  Moreover, 
hydro-electric  power  is  one  of  most 
effective  conservation  measures. 
Our  supply  of  Illinois  coal  is  not 
everlasting,  and  the  more  power 


26 


Approval  by  1 

It  is  true  that  the  whole  of  the 
$20,000,000  is  not  to  he  expended  on 
the  development  of  water  power, 
yet  whatever  may  be  the  amount 
of  water  power  produced  it  must 
bear  the  full  burden  of  paying  the 
entire  bond  issue  and  interest,  and 
after  that  has  been  done,  turn  into 
the  State  treasury  not  less  than  $2,- 
500,000  annually  to  “lessen  the 
taxes  of  the  taxpayers  of  this 
State.”  Let  us  again  refer  to  the 
Governor’s  statements  that  the 
“constitutional  amendment  was 
submitted  on  the  assumption  that 
the  water-power  would  pay  for  the 
waterway”  and  that  the  “invalidat¬ 
ing  of  that  assumption  would 
greatly  imperil,  if  it  would  not  de¬ 
stroy  the  chance  of  its  approval  by 
the  voters.”  The  failure  to  produce 
a  net  annual  revenue  of  $2,500,000 
for  the  State  treasury,  either  be¬ 
cause  of  inability  to  secure  the  nec¬ 
essary  flow  of  14,000  second  feet 
from  Lake  Michigan,  or  of  the  fail¬ 
ure  of  the  claimed  88  feet  of  total 
available  head  to  materialize,  in¬ 
validates  the  assumption  on  which 
the  constitutional  amendment  was 
submitted  to  the  voters,  just  as 
truly  as  does  the  fact  that  the 
State  does  not  possess  the  “un¬ 
doubted  right  to  the  total  water 
power  available  along  the  line  of 
the  proposed  waterway.” 


developed  by  hydraulic  energy  the- 
less  coal  used  and  the  longer  the 
supply  will  be  available.  It  will 
take  about  five  pounds  of  Illinois 
coal  to  produce  one  horse  power. 
Tf  all  of  the  water  power  we  esti¬ 
mate  available  under  the  State  plan 
were  used  for  twenty-four  hours  a 
day  365  days  in  the  year,  there 
would  be  876,000,000,  horsepower 
units  used.  Multiplying  this  by  5 
would  give  4,380,000,000  pounds  of 
coal.  Divide  this  result  by  2,000, 
and  we  have  2,190,000  tons.  Esti¬ 
mating  this  coal  at  $1.00  per  ton, 
shows  an  annual  saving  on  coal  of 
$2,190,000  whicn  appears  to  justify 
tne  project  as  a  conservation  meas¬ 
ure  alone. 

rs  Imperiled. 

I  admit  freely  that  whatever  the 
amount  of  water  power  produced  it 
must  bear  the  full  burden  of  pay¬ 
ing  the  entire  bond  issue  and  in¬ 
terest.  I  admit  further  that  the 
amount  of  water  power  produced 
depends  almost  entirely  oh  the  vol¬ 
ume  of  flow  available.  As  this 
volume  is  greater  or  less  than  the 
amount  estimated,  the  annual 
revenue  will  be  greater  or  less  than 
tue  amount  estimated.  Neverthe¬ 
less,  it  cannot  be  so  much  less 
that  the  entire  twenty  million  dol¬ 
lar  bond  issue  cannot  be  retireu 
with  interest  within  the  twenty 
years. 

The  failure  to  produce  a  net  an¬ 
nual  revenue  of  $2,500,000  for  the 
State  treasury  on  account  of 
either  of  the  possible  variations  in 
the  conditions  upon  which  the 
original  estimate  was  predicated 
does  not  invalidate  the  assumption 
on  which  the  constitutional  amend¬ 
ment  was  submitted  to  the  voters. 
Even  with  as  small  a  flow  as  10,000 
cubic  feet  per  second,  the  four 
plants  can  be  made  to  pay  an  an¬ 
nual  net  revenue  of  $2,000,000  and 
wrill  retire  the  bonds  with  interest 
within  the  twenty  year  period. 

It  is  not  a  fact  that,  the  State 
does  not  possess  the  undoubted 
right  to  the  total  water  power 
available  along  the  line  of  the  pro¬ 
posed  waterway.  It  has  not  been 
established  as  a  fact,  and  our  con¬ 
tention  that  the  State  owns  the 


27 


artificial  increment  of  flow  still 
stands.  Without  this  artificial  in¬ 
crement  of  flow  there  is  no  water 
power  of  value,  either  to  the  State 
or  to  vested  interests. 


Lessee  Without  Recourse. 


When  this  waterway  scheme  was 
in  embryo,  the  framers  decided  to 
limit  the  term  of  the  power  leases 
to  ten  years.  While  theoretically 
this  may  be  a  good  idea,  yet  a  pros¬ 
pective  lessee  may  look  askance  at 
having  the  cost  of  his  power  re¬ 
vamped  every  ten  years  by  “the 
boys.”  Again,  there  is  absolutely 
no  way  for  a  lessee,  be  he  a  resi¬ 
dent  of  this  State  or  of  another 
state,  to  compel  Illinois  to  fulfill  the 
covenants  contained  in  a  power 
lease.  Should  the  State,  for  any 
reason  whatever,  fail  to  deliver  the 
amount  of  power  called  for  in  a 
lease,  the  only  recourse  open  to  a 
citizen  of  this  State  would  be  to  se¬ 
cure,  if  possible,  an  award  for  dam¬ 
ages  from  our  Court  of  Claims  and, 
if  successful,  he  must  then  resort 
to  the  uncertain  method  of  lobby¬ 
ing  to  secure  a  special  legislative 
appropriation  to  cover  the  award. 
If  the  lessee  be  a  citizen  of  another 
state,  perhaps  in  the  Federal  Courts 
he  might  obtain  a  judgment  for 
damages  against  Illinois,  but  how 
could  he  collect  the  amount 
awarded?  There  is  no  authority 
vested  in  the  General  Government 
to  enter  a  sovereign  state  and  to 
levy  and  collect  taxes  to  meet  a 
judgment  obtained  for  the  failure 
of  said  state  to  comply  with  the 
terms  of  a  water-power  lease.  Un¬ 
der  such  circumstances  would  not 
prospective  bidders  for  electric 
power  be  wary  about  dealing  with 
a  party  that  could  not  be  com¬ 
pelled  to  keep  the  terms  of  its 
agreement?  ts  it  probable  that 
large  sums  of  money  would  be  in¬ 
vested  in  manufacturing  plants  to 
be  operated  under  short  term  power 
leases  and  with  no  security  that 
the  State  will  supply  the  power 
called  for  by  the  terms  of  the 
lease? 


Here  Mr.  Ward  and  I  are  in  full 
accord.  Without  discoursing  upon 
i  the  rights  of  the  State’s  lessees  and 
the  protection;  of  those '  rights,  I 
am  firmly  of  the  opinion  that  the 
State  should  not  lease  any  of  this 
water  power  to  any  middle  man  to 
be  retailed  to  the  people  for  the 
profit  of  the  middle  man.  My  opin¬ 
ion  is  and  always  has  been  that 
the  State  should  do  what  some  of 
our  opponents  call  going  into  the 
water  power  business;  that  the 
State  should  run  these  plants  for 
profit  that  we  should  have  munici¬ 
pal  ownership  of  these  plants,  if 
you  will.  I  do  not  accept  the  doc¬ 
trine  of  municipal  ownership  uni¬ 
versally,  but  I  believe  that  in  this 
instance  State  ownership  and  oper¬ 
ation  of  these  plants  under  the  re¬ 
strictions  of  the  Civil  Service  Law 
should  obtain.  I  am  upheld  in  this 
belief  by  the  successful  operation 
of  the  Sanitary  District  of  Chi¬ 
cago’s  municipally  owned  plant, 
and  the  large  annual  revenue 
which  it  returns  to  that  municipal- 
i  ity. 


28 


Cost  of  Similar  Works. 


The  first  estimate  of  the  cost  of  j 
the  Illinois  and  Michigan  canal  was 
$600,000.  It  cost  a.bout  $8,000,000. 
The  first  estimate  of  the  cost  of  the 
Hennepin  canal  was  $4,500,000,  and 
it  actually  cost  over  $7,000,000.  The 
first  estimate  of  the  cost  of  the 
Panama  canal  was  $150,000,000,  and 
the  last  Act  of  Congress  made  avail¬ 
able  $5u0,000,000.  The  first  esti¬ 
mate  of  the  cost  of  the  Chicago 
Drainage  canal  was  about 
$20,000,000;  $65,000,000  have  been 
expended  and  the  end  is  not  yet. 
The  first  estimate  of  the  cost  of 
this  proposed  water-power  water¬ 
way  is  $20,000,000.  Its  ultimate 
cost  is  problematical. 


I  do  not  know  what  the  first 
estimate  of  the  Illinois  and  Michi¬ 
gan  Canal  was.  I  believe  it  is  safe 
to  assume  that  Mr.  Ward  is  in  er¬ 
ror  in  his  statement  that  the  orig¬ 
inal  estimate  of  its  cost  was  $600,- 
000,  because  it  is  a  fact  that  he  is 
in  error  when  he  states  that  its 
final  cost  was  $8,000,000.  As  a 
matter  of  fact,  the  total  amount 
expended  in  the  construction  of 
the  Illinois  and  Michigan  Canal 
from  its  beginning  in  1836  until  the 
deepening  was  completed,  1871,  was 
$9,869,981.85.  The  principal  and 
interest  due  to  bond  holders  and 
other  evidences  of  canal  indebted¬ 
ness  were  extinguished  on  April 
30,  1871.  Instead  of  being  a  bur¬ 
den  upon  the  taxpayers  of  the 
State,  the  canal  paid  its  wray.  After 
its  indebtedness  was  extinguished 
the  canal  continued  to  operate  prof¬ 
itably  and  not  until  1876  did  the 
gross  expenses  exceed  the  tolls.  At 
that  time  me  business  had  out¬ 
grown  the  capacity  of  the  canal  and 
the  railroads  had  waged  relentless 
war  upon  it  until  it  was  finally 
forced  out  of  business.  For  the 
purposes  of  argument  I  will  admit 
that  the  first  estimate  of  the  cost 
of  the  Hennepin  Canal  was  $4,500,- 
000  and  that  its  actual  cost  was 
largely  in  excess  of  this  amount. 
The  canal  was  built  at  a  cost  of  less 
man  $72,000  per  mile,  which  is  but 
little  more  than  the  face  value  per 
mile  of  the  stocks  and  bonds  of 
the  Rock  Islanu  Railway  that  par¬ 
allels  it.  The  canal  is  physically 
capable  of  passing  more  freight  per 
day  than  this  adjacent  double-track 
railway  and  passing  it  at  a  mater¬ 
ially  lower  cost  per  ton  mile.  The 
i rouble  with  the  Hennepin  Canal, 
as  stated  by  an  eminent  authority, 
is  thai  it  “runs  from  the  neck  of 
the  woods  to  the  forks  of  the  creek. 
It  arrives  nowhere,  but  untimately 
as  other  waterway  connections  are 
made,  and  especially  an  adequate 
one  from  the  Illinois  river  to  Chie- 
cago,  and  as  our  density  of  popu¬ 
lation  increases,  the  Hennepin 
Canal  will  serve  a  useful  purpose. 
It  is  ahead  of  its  time.  If  it  served 
no  other  purpose,  it  has  been  worth 


all  that  it  cost  and  more  in  regu¬ 
lating  freight  rates  upon  the  Rock 
Island  and  connecting  railways.” 

In  referring  to  the  Panama 
Canal,  Mr.  Ward  states  that  the 
first  estimate  of  cost  was  $150,- 
000,000,  and  that  something  like 
$500,000,000  has  been  appropriated 
for  it.  The  fact  is  that  the  esti¬ 
mate  of  the  advisory  hoard  of  en¬ 
gineers,  which  made  the  plans  and 
determined  the  type  of  canal,  was 
in  round  numbers  $140,000,000. 
Tnis  applied  to  construction  and 
engineering  only,  and  did  not  in¬ 
clude  the  $40,000,000  paid  the 
French  Company,  the  $10,000,000 
paid  to  the  government  of  Panama, 
and  tne  enormous  cost  of  sanita¬ 
tion  and  zone  government.  This 
estimate  was  for  a  cana4  of  definite 
dimensions  and  certain  plans. 
These  plans  have  been  altered  and 
the  dimensions  greatly  enlarged. 
For  instance,  the  original  plan 
called  for  a  width  of  200  feet 
through  the  great  Culebra  cut. 
Tnat  cut  is  being  excavated  to  a 
width  of  300  feet.  This  is  only  one 
of  many  changes  which  have  been 
made,  every  one  of  which  is  adding 
to  the  cost  of  the  work.  The  lock 
dimensions  have  also  been  enlarged 
and  the  cost  consequently  in¬ 
creased. 

Referring  to  the  Chicago  Drain¬ 
age  Canal,  Mr.  Ward  states  that 
the  first  estimate  of  cost  was  about 
$20,000,000.  Mr.  Ward  was  long 
employed  by  the  Sanitary  District 
of  Chicago,  and  he  should  know 
that  there  was  no  comprehensive 
original  estimate  of  the  cost.  Mr. 
I sham  Randolph,  for  fourteen  years 
Cnief  Engineer  of  the  work,  those 
fourteen  years  extending  over  the 
entire  period  of  its  construction, 
states  that  during  his  service  as 
Chief  Enginer  he  failed  to  find  a 
comprehensive  original  estimate  of 
cost.  There  was  a  gross  esti¬ 
mate  amounting  to  about  $18,000.- 
000,  covering  the  construction  cost 
alone  from  Robey  Street  to  LocK- 
port  only.  This  estimate  did  not 
include  the  cost  of  railway  changes, 
cost  of  right-of-way,  nor  was  there 
any  item  for  administration  or  in¬ 
terest.  The  expenditures  of  the 
Sanitary  District  of  Chicago  are  to 


30 


Each  County's 

The  Internal  Improvement  Com¬ 
mission  has  admitted  that  interest 
to  the  amount  of  $4,800,000  will  ac¬ 
cumulate  during  the  period  of  con¬ 
struction.  This  will  make  the  total 
debt,  at  the  close  of  construction 
$24,800,000.  Based  on  assessed 
values  for  the  year  1910,  as  fixed 
by  the  State  Board  of  Equalization 
and  assuming  that  the  work  can  be 
completed  for  a  total  of  $24,800,000, 
the  following  is  the  share  of  the 
above  named  sum  that  must  be  paid 
by  the  taxpayers  of  the  counties 
named : 


date  about  $66,000,000.  In  this  to- 
lal  is  included  right-of-way  for  the 
main  channel,  right-of-way  for  the 
north  shore  extension,  part  of  the 
right-of-way  for  the  Calumet-Sag 
extension,  cost  of  railroad  changes, 
controlling  works,  the  extension 
irom  the  controlling  works  to 
South  Street  in  Joliet,  water  power 
extension  and  development,  tne 
Chicago  River  improvement,  cost¬ 
ing  some  $10,000,000,  cost  of  con¬ 
structing  the  north  shore  channel, 
twenty  years  administration  and 
interest  bn  bonded  indebtedness 
for  a  like  period.  The  unit  prices 
used  in  the  early  estimates  were 
very  nearly  those  obtained  when 
tne  work  was  let.  The  partial  es¬ 
timate  referred  to  was  based  upon 
a  channel  16  feet  deep  in  the  earth 
end  18  feet  in  the  rock.  As  built 
the  channel  is  24  feet  deep  through¬ 
out.  Comparisons  of  the  estimate 
of  cost  of  the  proposed  State  water¬ 
way  with  the  estimate  costs  of  the 
other  channels  referred  to  are  de¬ 
signedly  unfair.  These  compari¬ 
sons  do  not  go  sufficiently  into  de¬ 
tail  and  the  detailed  investigation 
reveals  the  significant  fact  that  in 
the  case  of  the  Sanitary  District 
canal  unit  prices  for  which  the 
work  was  done  were  very  nearly 
equal  the  unit  prices  assumed  in 
the  estimate,  and  in  the  case  of  the 
Panama  Canal  the  unit  prices  at 
which  the  work  was  estimated  are 
far  in  excess  of  the  actual  unit 
costs  for  wmch  the  work  is  being 
done. 


Share  oe  Cost. 

I  take  issue  with  Mr.  Ward’s 
statement  that  the  Internal  Im¬ 
provement  Commission  has  admit¬ 
ted  that  interest  amounting  to 
$4,800,000  will  accumulate  during 
the  period  of  construction.  The 
statement  referred  to  is  contained 
in  the  prospectus  which  we  sent 
out  in  the  campaign  for  the  bond 
issue.  The  statement  was  written 
by  me  and  is  as  follows: 

“Assuming  that  the  entire  issue 
was  sold  at  the  start  $800,000  per 
annum  must  be  paid  for  interest  at 
4  per  cent  *  *  *.  On  this  basis 


31 


Adams . 

.  .  . .  $  251,242 

Alexander  . 

62,683 

Bond  . 

56,473 

Boone  . . 

.  87,894 

Brown  . 

40,380 

Bureau  . 

250,802 

Calhoun  . 

25,627 

Carroll  . 

103,334 

Cass  . 

96,809 

Champaign  .... 

332,386 

Christian  . 

192,581 

Clark  . 

88,672 

Clay  . 

53,115 

Clinton  . 

64,092 

Coles  . 

134,135 

Cook  . 

. . .  .  10,321,787 

Crawford  . 

96,809 

Cumberland  . . . 

56,834 

DeKalb  . 

210,568 

DeWitt  . 

. . . .  108,563 

Douglas  . 

118,075 

DuPage  . 

161,814 

Edgar  . 

.  . .  .  175,676 

Edwards  . 

34,891 

Effingham  . 

69,682 

Fayette  . 

99,435 

Ford  . 

147,659 

Franklin . 

60,734 

Fulton  . 

183,227. 

Gallatin  . 

31,747 

Greene  . 

.  .  .  .  100,291 

Grundy  . . 

132,061 

Hamilton  . 

42,127 

Hancock  . 

160,698 

Hardin  . 

10,109 

Henderson  . 

-  76,365 

Henry  . 

226,267 

Iroquois  . 

296,367 

Jackson  . 

72,556 

Jasper  . 

59,809 

Jefferson  . 

64,024 

Jersey  . 

51,323 

JoDaviess  . 

116,779 

Johnson  . 

32,266 

Kane  . 

382,098 

Kankakee  . 

169,782 

Kendall  . 

74,911 

Knox  . 

226,650 

Lake  . 

215,504 

LaSalle  . 

431,122 

Lawrence  . 

83,814 

Lee  . 

203,536 

Livingston  . 

324,677 

Logan  . 

190,902 

Macon  . 

236,162 

Macoupin  . 

168,328 

Madison  . 

311,976 

Marion  . 

77,875 

Marshall  . 

105,960 

Mason  . 

83,645 

there  would  be  advanced  by  the 
State  in  the  six  years  before  the 
plants  began  to  show  earnings  $4,- 
800,00  on  the  bonds  *  *  *.  This 

presents  the  case  in  its  most  un¬ 
favorable  aspect.” 

This  ridiculous  assumption  was 
made  with  the  express  purpose  of 
presenting  the  case  in  its  most 
unfavorable  aspect,  in  order  to  pre¬ 
sent  it  to  the  voters  in  its  most 
conservative  light.  Anyone  who 
assumes  that  the  entire  issue  of 
bonds  would  actually  be  sold  at  the 
cutset  does  so  either  through  dens¬ 
est  ignorance  or  through  a  deliber¬ 
ate  intention  to  misrepresent  the 
facts.  The  facts  are  that  the  bonds 
will  not  be  sol'd  in  a  lump  when 
their  issuance  is  authorized,  but 
that  they  will  be  issued  from 
time  to  time  as  the  money  is 
needed.  The  major  expenditure 
will  come  in  the  last  three  years 
and  at  the  close  of  the  work.  The 
net  interest  account,  therefore, 
based  on  the  probable  distribution 
of  expenditures  during  the  six 
years  of  construction  would  be  be¬ 
tween  $1,600,000  and  $1,700,000.  It 
will  be  practical  to  complete  one 
or  two  of  the  power  plants  and 
begin  selling  power  before  the 

whole  work  is  completed.  It  also 

will  be  practicable  to  defer  part  of 
the  cost  of  constructing  the  locks 
until  after  the  earnings  have  be¬ 
gun.  It  will  then  be  seen  that  any 
contingency  which  might  affect  the 
cost  of  the  work  may  be  met  with¬ 
out  increasing  the  bond  issue 
authorized. 

Mr.  Ward’s  tabulation  of  the 

amount  that  must  be  paid  by  the 
taxpayers  of  each  of  the  counties 
in  the  State,  based  upon  his  wil¬ 
fully  distorted  statement  of  the 

total  indebtedness,  is  not  at  all 

germain  to  the  discussion.  The 
people  of  the  State  and  of  each 
county  are  merely  asked  to  lend 
their  credit  for  three  or  four  years 
of  the  period  of  construction.  In 
three  years  after,  the  work  is 
started  it  will  begin  to  return 
revenue  and  before  it  is  completed 
the  revenue  from  the  power  plants 
alone  will  take  care  of  the  interest 
on  the  bonds  and  provide  for  their 
amortization. 


11 

74 

97 

73 

41 

58 

98 

63 

30 

11 

76 

36 

51 

49 

54 

28 

30 

61 

68 

91 

09 

66 

76 

92 

41 

21 

54 

03 

65 

59 

73 

86 

26 

93 

19 

52 

79 

19 

26 

89 

87 

58 

74 

01 

08 

55 

69 

97 

94 

58 

99 

20 

43 

53 

85 

72 

14 

70 

54 

94 


32 


Massac . 

.  . . .  $  31,364 

41 

McDonough  .  . . 

154,939 

96 

McHenry  . 

178,821 

09 

McLean  . 

.  445,638 

34 

Menard  . 

79,847 

95 

Mercer  . 

. .  . .  123,958 

73 

Monroe  . 

51,582 

79 

Montgomerv  .  . . 

. .  .  .  159,628 

28 

Morgan  . 

183,633 

38 

Moultrie  . 

. . .  .  81,189 

08 

Ogle  . 

.  . .  .  208,483 

73 

Peoria  . 

404,018 

23 

Perry  . 

.  . . .  51,470 

09 

Piatt  . 

.  .  .  .  130,326 

28 

Pike  . 

.  . .  .  110,603 

78 

Pope  . 

20,409 

97 

Pulaski  . 

.  . .  .  26,473 

23 

Putnam  . 

34,643 

98 

Randolph  . 

79,633 

82 

Richland  . 

49,418 

95 

Rock  Island  . . . 

216,237 

49 

Saline  . 

57,240 

33 

Sangamon  . 

439,755 

40 

Schuyler  . 

60,012 

75 

Scott  . 

52,991 

54 

Shelby  . 

156,427 

60 

Stark  . 

. . .  .  73,345 

16 

St.  Clair  . 

. . .  .  373,251 

13 

Stevenson  . 

.  .  .  .  175,079 

45 

Tazewell  . 

194,869 

57 

Union  . 

46,161 

92 

Vermilion  . 

385,197 

33 

Wabash  . 

47,998 

93 

Warren  . 

.  . . .  162,930 

39 

Washington  .... 

53,960 

76 

Wayne  . 

73,153 

57 

White  ‘ . 

62,897 

87 

Whiteside  . 

188,456 

94 

Will  . . 

339,970 

82 

Williamson  .... 

.  .  .  .  110,265 

68 

Winnebago  . 

. . .  .  324,936 

64 

Woodford  . 

144,357 

43 

Total  . 

.  . .  .  $24,791,329 

00 

Financial  Problem  Confronting  People. 


The  problem  that  now  actually 
confronts  the  people  of  Illinois  is 
the  purchase  of  all  water-power 
rights.  Those  at  Dresden,  owned 
by  the  Economy  Light  &  Power 
Company,  are  estimated  by  the  In¬ 
ternal  Improvement  Commissioners 
to  be  over  28,000  horse-power,  and 
the  holdings  of  the  same  company 
at  Hickory  Creek  are  about  14,000 
horse  power.  In  his  message  of 
November  6,  1907,  Governor  De- 
neen  says:  “The  value  of  this 


Mr.  Ward  states  that  the  prob¬ 
lem  now  actually  confronting  the 
people  is  the  purchase  of  all  the 
water  power  rights  along  the  river. 
This  is  not  true.  Considering  the 
alleged  water  power  rights  referred 
to  seriatim:  we  do  not  believe  that 
the  Economy  Light  and  Power 
Company  has  a  water  power  at 
Dresden  Heights.  Even  if  it  was 
entitled  to  the  artificial  increment 
of  flow  from  the  Drainage  Canal, 
there  are  lands  within  the  pool 


33 


power  is  variously  estimated  at 
from  $400  to  $500  per  horse  power.” 
Therefore,  the  Economy  Light  & 
Power  Company’s  holdings  must  be 
worth  from  $16,800,000  to  $21,000,- 
000.  The  power  at  Marseilles 
should  be  valued  on  a  basis  of 
24,900  horse  power  (see  page  51  of 
report  of  Internal  Improvement 
Commission,  1909,  in  connection 
with  page  3  of  the  Governor's 
message  of  November  6,  1907). 

Applying  the  values  per  horse¬ 
power  stated  above,  this  property 
must  be  worth  from  $9,960,000  to 
$12,450,000  and  the  total  value  of 
these  two  properties,  according  to 
the  eminent  authorities  quoted, 
must  be  from  $26,760,000  to  $33,- 
450,000. 

It  is  inconceivable  that  a  jury 
-could  be  found  which  would  give 
the  riparian  owners  a  verdict  for 
a  smaller  sum  than  values  tne 
State  authorities  have  themselves 
placed  upon  the  property.  No  one 
would  contend  that  the  State  could 
take  private  property,  which  priv¬ 
ate  individuals  are  using  in  their 
private  business,  for  the  purpose 
of  conducting  that  same  business 
with  tnat  same  property,  without 
the  private  owners  receiving  from 
the  State  full  value  therefor. 


which  will  be  formed  by  the  com¬ 
pany’s  dam  at  this  point  and  which 
will  be  flooded,  which  do  not  belong 
to  the  company.  It  cannot  flood 
these  lands  if  it  does  not  possess 
tnem,  it  has  no  power  of  condemna¬ 
tion  and,  therefore,  cannot  acquire 
them.  Mr.  Ward’s  assertion  that 
the  Internal  Improvement  Com¬ 
mission  estimated  that  the  Econ¬ 
omy  Light  and  Power  Company 
owned  over  28,000  horse  power  at 
this  point  is  a  deliberate  misstate¬ 
ment.  The  Internal  Improvement 
Commission  never  estimated  what 
amount  of  power  was  owned  or 
claimed  to  be  owned  by  the  Econ¬ 
omy  Light  and  Power  Company  at 
this  point.  Our  estimates  for  power 
development  at  Dresden  Heights 
were  based  upon  a  much  higher 
head  than  the  dam  which  is  pro¬ 
posed  by  the  Economy  Light  & 
Power  Company,  and  the  State  dam 
is  to  be  located  about  a  mile  down 
stream  beyond  the  designated  lo 
cation  of  the  Economy  Light  & 
Power  Company  dam. 

The  alleged  water  power  rights 
of  the  same  Company  at  Hickory 
Creek,  which  Mr.  Ward  states 
amounts  to  14,000  horse  power,  are 
not  so  well  established.  The  com¬ 
pany  has  no  water  power  and  can¬ 
not  have  any  water  power  at  this 
point  without  joining  its  dam 
onto  -  the  banks  and  land  of  the 
Illinois  and  Michigan  Canal.  It 
has  not  been  granted  any  right  by 
the  Canal  Commission  to  connect 
its  dam  to  these  lands.  It  cannot 
acquire  the  right  to  do  this  for  a 
period  of  more  than  twenty  years. 
Asuming  that  it  could  complete  the 
dam  by  reason  of  consummating 
some  such  agreement  with  the 
Canal  Commission,  it  still  could 
not  fill  the  pool  created  by  the  dam 
because  that  would  flood  land 
which  does  not  belong  to  the  com¬ 
pany  and  which  it  cannot  acquire 
because  it  has  not  the  right  of 
eminent  domain. 

When  Governor  Deneen  stated 
that  “the  value  of  this  power  is 
variously  estimated  at  $400  to  $500 
per  horse  power,  he  made  the  state¬ 
ment  upon  the  advice  of  the  In¬ 
ternal  Improvement  Commission. 
T  believe  now  that  these  values  are 


34 


too  low;  that  in  the  light  of  the 
cases  referred  to  by  Mr.  Ward  in 
this  footnote  and  in  the  light  of 
values  revealed  for  other  water 
power  plants  that  complete  hydro¬ 
electric  developments  in  this  sec¬ 
tion  of  the  river  as  going  concerns 
have  a  value  more  nearly  approach¬ 
ing  $1,000  per  horse  power.  Mr. 
Ward’s  reflections  upon  jury 
awards  are  immaterial.  He  cannot 
succeed  in  giving  fictitious  values 
to  water  power  right  that  do  not 
exist. 


Conclusion'. 


The  inevitable  conclusion  follows 
that,  if  the  State  takes  possession 
of  the  water  power  rights  of  pri¬ 
vate  individuals,  nothing  can  be 
accomplished  with  the  $20,000,000 
toward  the  construction  of  the 
waterway.  However,  for  the  $20,- 
000,000  a  waterway,  after  the  plans 
of  the  United  States  engineers  can 
be  built  from  Joliet  to  Utica,  pro¬ 
vided  the  State  leaves  private 
owners  in  possession  of  their  pri¬ 
vate  property,  as  do  the  plans  of 
the  United  States  for  a  waterway 
down  the  valley.  The  idea  of  the 
government  or  of  the  State  develop¬ 
ing  and  distributing  hydro-electric 
energy  is  so  foreign  to  the  uni¬ 
versal  conception  of  the  proper 
functions  of  government  that  the 
inability  to  do  so  should  be  re¬ 
garded  as  fortunate.  The  State 
should  confine  the  use  of  its  powers 
to  governmental  purposes. 

Ebin  J.  Ward. 


The  inevitable  conclusion  follows 
that  if  the  State  takes  possession  of 
the  water  power  that  is  hers  by 
right  of  having  bought  and  paid  for 
it  with  her  people’s  money;  and  if 
vested  interests  do  not  succeed  in 
filching  from  the  State  the  water 
power  paid  for  with  the  people’s 
money,  the  waterway  from  Lock- 
port  to  Utica  will  be  built,  an 
enormous  carrying  trade  will  be 
developed  through  the  waterway,  a 
thriving  industrial  territory  will 
spring  up  by  reason  of  the  water¬ 
way,  and  cheap  power;  the  cost  of 
the  waterway  will  be  paid  back 
from  the  proceeds  of  the  water 
power,  and  the  State  will  reap  the 
benefit  of  a  perpetual  annual 
revenue. 

Robert  Isham  Randolph. 


t 


rri: 


UNIVERSITY  OF  ILLINOIS-URBANA 


3  0112112905465 


